Talk:Aztec, New Mexico

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: New Mexico C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	New Mexico portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Mexico (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Cities C‑class

	Cities portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Aztec, New Mexico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:19, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Required Discussion Before Making Changes

Background/Preface

A 'contributor' recently began making wholesale deletions in this entry WITHOUT any discussion or inquiry. After an attempt to revert them was subsequently re-deleted, the 'contributor' insisted to "please discuss your proposed changes"... even though that person never initiated any discussion about their own deletions. They further sent a threatening message to my user page stating that I was being 'disruptive'. They have been involved in Wikipedia much longer than I, but the extensive double-standard is interesting, to say the least: a contributor can delete and revert other people's changes, but other people cannot revert theirs?

These are statements of fact to provide some contextual background. I am not attacking the contributor, per se, and am not being 'disruptive'. In fact, I believe that we should adhere to that user's own insistence...

Proposed Rule-Making for this Page

As a result, for this page, I suggest we execute on that premise, such that:

Any proposed changes must be discussed prior to submission.

Moreover, let us hold everyone accountable to that standard. Forthwith, any edits, other than minor corrections, that are not given an opportunity for discussion here (at least a few days) prior to being entered are subject to being reverted by other users without objection.

The Aztec community is small and does not change rapidly or dramatically, so it should not be a great ask to vet changes or additions when they are proposed.

Edits So Far

I recently made a few minor corrections of which my brief in-edit explanations should be sufficient and are factually supported; some of these bring back some of the deletions made (noted above). However, if there are any questions about these, I am monitoring this page, so feel free to reply here and I will respond. BTW, if any of the elements the other contributor has removed remain factually relevant (you'll have to review the history), let's discuss. In my opinion some of the deletions were warranted, but others were not, and did not violate any principles or standards of Wikipedia. (As a side note, I live in this geographic area of the country, so if needed let me know and I can reach out to verify any facts in-person when traveling.) 4CornersGuy (talk) 20:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]