Cricrucra

August 2014

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Black Kite (talk) 10:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• You've already reverted four times today and are liable to be blocked. Any further edit-warring will result in a block. Thank you, Black Kite (talk) 10:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• It doesn't matter whether you're right or not, both of you are still edit-warring. I didn't warn him because you've already done so. Black Kite (talk) 11:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• It doesn't count as vandalism according to Wikipedia rules, however. See WP:NOTVAND (section "disruptive editing and stubbornness"). I have closed both your entry at WP:AIV, and his entry at WP:ANI. Black Kite (talk) 11:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• That's a reasonable suggestion. I will protect the article now. Black Kite (talk) 11:15, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• No, the edit at least has to be reasonable. Your example of New York is vandalism because it's obviously nonsense. However, the other editor is claiming that the club is in fact a successor club to the one formed in 1948 (rather than the same club) which is at least a reasonable claim, even if it's incorrect. Incidentally, the two quotes at the bottom of the page also appear to also say that this is a "successor" club. Black Kite (talk) 11:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• As I said, I'm not saying he's right, and he should source his change. Black Kite (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)