User talk:Schmetterling
Carla Martin
Can you explain your edits to the Carla Martin page? They make it look like a resume and not an encyclopedia article. Frankg 14:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Carla Martin, you will be blocked. PubliusFL 16:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Stop editing the Carla Martin article. Exeunt 22:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
One could say "STOP-TIME OUT" to all of you who have so self-righteously insisted on reverting back to a Wikipedia stub that is largely inaccurate, as well as inflammatory. Yes, the present stub could be revised to look less like a resume, however, the information contained within the edit is far more accurate and complete concerning CM's biography than what appeared in the original stub, and as stated previously, is sourced through the references and links themselves. Schmetterling 16:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Seriously, the User Exeunt is vandalising this stub repeatedly, and should be banned-information such as "born circa 1955" is irrelevant because it is per se not factual, and other previous edits did not clearly reflect the issues of this matter. Other information was added which was merely filler material, but irrelevant to the legal issues in this case. The stub now is clearly sourced and factual, but apparently some users prefer inaccurate, sloppy, as well as slanderous, information to be entered onto a wikipedia entry, rather than the truth. Malicious postings make Wikipedia entries far less helpful than they otherwise could be.
3RR
Your recent editing history at Carla Martin shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about 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.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 16:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
User notice: temporary 3RR block
Regarding reversions[1] made on March 8 2007 to Carla Martin
