User talk:Njdeda Rlase

Welcome to my messages.

Bold Revert Discuss

Hi, I'm Dennis, an admin here at Wikipedia. I don't have an opinion on the edits but I did want to explain policy to you a bit, coming from an outsider with pretty good experience. You might want to read WP:BRD in regards to BOL Network. You added a lot of material to this article, some looks interesting, some less so, but it was a lot of material. Some of the sourcing like the company's website and Twitter aren't the best, but those kinds of sources do have their place. You've been reverted in adding all this material to what was a fairly stable article. Don't just add it back. Instead, you need to go to the article talk page and discuss the changes. You may find the community supports some of it, a lot of it, or all of it, but it is still up to you to discuss first since you are the one adding the material that someone else found to be contentious. Otherwise, you reverting back and forth is a form of edit warring, and it can get you blocked. I see you have begun discussion, I suggest being patient and allowing a 3rd or 4th person to join in the discussion, or at least start discussing individual elements of your edits, find the parts you both can agree on, then work from there. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 16:21, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you sir for telling me about this. I have read BRD and the three revert bright line rule. I will obey all wikipedia rules. Editor TouristerMan, Himself a new editor, has reached the brightline. I have warned him as rules you showed me say. Now I am trying to find out where to report if he breaks the rule because he is not discussing information with me he is undoing everything and then using that version which is unfair editing. BRD should be follow by both parties.

I know about brightline rule as well after reading it. I know I have also reached brightline I will not revert more than 3rd time. I want to discuss it but every time he reply he also revert previous weeks edits. I do not want to be blocked. I will wait for discussion or tell wikipedia about his breaking of brightline rule

• No, you don't understand. You think you do, but you do not. Forget bright line rules. Edit warring is edit warring. An admin can block you for reverting once, twice, three times. We do not have to wait until you revert 4 times in 24 hours. It being a bright line only means that no one is going to question it. We are empowered to block whenever we feel someone is not engaging in good faith discussion and is just reverting. That is left to our discretion, answerable to the community. You added material, someone reverted. You need to leave it OUT until after the discussion. Period. The fact that you keep reverting it back in, that is edit warring. It doesn't matter how many times you do it in 24 hours, you can't just edit war a little and get away with it. Let me be perfect clear, if you revert back in before having a consensus, I will block you, assuming you don't get blocked at WP:AN3. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 20:35, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I promised you that I will not break brightline rule, I am already at brightline which means I will not revert more. Does it not sound agreement to you? Why will wikipedia administrators block some one who has agreed to them? If you see, touristerman is not in agreement to stopping reverts because he came and changed my version and he has done 4 reverts in 24 hrs. Is it fair to allow him this? I *am* trying to engage in discussion in good faith. I am being accused of removing scandal which I did not do. I only added other facts. I do not understand why this touristerman is changing to a new version and continuing that version and I do not understand why this is done with so hostility after 2 weeks of no objection

I don't care about the brightline rule. I seldom pay that clause any attention, edit warring is edit warring. The first time I edited here, I politely told you to not revert, but you reverted again. You are actually at 4 reverts, which breaches the brightline, and another admin may very well come in and block you. I was trying to keep you from getting blocked. It is very simple: if you add content and someone reverts you, don't add it back until people on the talk page agree adding it back is a good idea. Reverting it one time is as bad as 4 times. He can revert it because he is challenging it. Has he not added some of it back with proper sources? Dennis Brown - 2¢ 20:46, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Sir I am at 3 revert. First it was my new edit not revert or changing of other editors. Then I revert 3 time. I understand the editwarring rules better. I was understanding that the brightline rule was the limit I agree we should not editwar below limit too. You can see that I am not reverting him this time because I understand the rules. I see he understand rules but he is still breaking. You would not agree that challenger and editor should both not editwar. Is touristerman at peace too? No, he is reverting for fourth time in 24 hrs. He has reverted after sufficient warning. Maybe last edit on edge of 24 hrs, it is gamification. I dont like it. Please be fair. You do not see me reverting anymore.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Njdeda_Rlase reported by User:TouristerMan (Result: ). Thank you. TouristerMan (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)