User talk:Crabipedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Crabipedia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! -🐦Do☭torWho42 (📼) 08:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017[edit]

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Netflix, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:48, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As noted in my edit summary, the removal had been discussed on the talk page. -Crabipedia (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Netflix. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 21:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddst1: I haven't been repeatedly reverting anyone's edits (just check my edit history)...do you have me confused with someone else? -Crabipedia (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddst1: I would still like to know why this edit warring notice was posted on my page. There was only a single reversion of another user's edits and that was because they had undone an edit that had been discussed among editors on the talk page (and not even because they disagreed with the change, but because they seemed to have missed the edit summary noting the talk page discussion). -Crabipedia (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because you were edit warring on Netflix: revert #1, revert #2. BRR Toddst1 (talk) 13:04, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddst1: That is not what edit warring is (nor, despite your labels, are those two reverts). I would recommend you take a look at Wikipedia:Edit warring to learn about what Edit Warring is before you post unwarranted warnings to other users talk pages. BRR does not apply as the it was not a bold edit as it had already been agreed upon by editors on the talk page, nor was the reversion due to disagreement over the edit (the other editor merely was unaware of the talk page discussion). If you some reason you do not agree with the removal, each article has this thing called a talk page where editors discuss issues related to the article. You are more than welcome to join the conversation there. -Crabipedia (talk) 21:33, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an opinion on the edit. That's between @Oshwah: and you. It looks like s/he apparently didn't understand why you were deleting that material.

However, there is only 1 R in BRD. Any more is edit warring, whether you want to think so or not. "BRR does not apply" You cannot not exempt yourself from BRD either.

What I said was "You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Netflix." If you don't like hearing that, then don't do this: revert #1, revert #2. Toddst1 (talk) 17:43, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddst1: The mere act of reverting (even reverting a revert) does not itself constitute edit warring. It's clear that you don't fully understand what edit warring is, so I will again refer you to Wikipedia:Edit warring. The initial change was made based on agreement of several editors on the talk page. It was first reverted, not out of disagreement with the change, but out of not realizing the reason for the edit (that it was agreed upon on the talk page). I reverted back to the change agreed upon by the editors on the talk page and provided more clear explanation referring to the talk page discussion in the edit summary. That is not edit warring by any means. -Crabipedia (talk) 21:48, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you have such difficulty accepting feedback. Good luck editing. Toddst1 (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddst1:I'd welcome feedback if you had any to give. Hopefully through this discussion you've learned more about various Wikipedia policies - what they are and how they apply. Always best to actually have an understanding before you go posting posting about them to other users. -13:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]