User talk:Gromitml

October 2017

Hello, I'm Tornado chaser. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Anthony J. Rock seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tornado chaser (talk) 23:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Tornado chaser. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Anthony J. Rock, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Tornado chaser (talk) 23:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

August 2019

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Fascism. 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. Grayfell (talk) 01:51, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Fascism; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 02:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Fascism

Hello. The follow banner is on the top of Talk:Fascism:

As the template explains, the issue has been discussed many, many times before, usually with identical arguments and sources. As you might expect, editor's patience for repeated argument is very short. If you really think you have a brand-new perspective, you can start a new section on the talk page. To be blunt, I seriously doubt there's anything new to say on this, but you have that option. To save everyone's time, please review past discussion, however. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 02:01, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Contrary to your comment on Grayfell's talk page, [1],what Grayfell wrote on here was a very accurate summary of the situation concerning fascism being a right-wing ideology: there are no authoritative reliable sources which say otherwise. And, despite your denial, you are edit warring - you have added the same or very similar material to the article 3 times now. The next time you do it, you will be reported.

Also, calling Grayfell a "fascist" is a violation of our policy against making personal attacks. Please take this as a warning not to make a personal attack again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Some clarification may be in order. The left–right political spectrum is broad, extending from socialism and communism on the extreme left end to fascists and nazis on the right end, and just because someone is on the left of center does not mean they will become socialists or communists, just as someone on the right of center will not necessarily become a fascist or nazi. Most people tend to hover somewhere near center, finding a place they find comfortable, without them ever sliding to the ends. Extremists do that. A society is healthy when most people do this. We need people on both sides of center, just as long as they don't go to extremes.

This tendency to settle in one spot on the spectrum and defend it is so strong that European history is replete with examples of communists and socialists fighting each other to the death. Not all socialists approve of communism, just as social democrats generally don't approve of socialism, and democrats don't approve of social democracy, even though all four of these political groupings are on the left wing, with seemingly small gaps between them. In fact, those gaps are large enough to fight over. The same occurs on the right wing. Republicans don't approve of fascists, and fascists don't approve of nazis, although the gap between fascists and nazis is very small, with lots of cross-over, whereas there is a larger gap between your typical republican and fascists. -- BullRangifer (talk) 03:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

I came here to caution you about WP:NPA but it appears that's already happened. Please be aware there are a lot of eyes on this article and disruptive editing, including WP:NPA violations, will be dealt with swiftly. Simonm223 (talk) 12:22, 28 August 2019 (UTC)