330:
small in comparison to a long list of countries (seen it first hand as a
Canadian)). Considering it also had no source to back up the list of countries either, I honestly am contemplating whether I should've just replaced American English with North American English, replaced the list of countries with Commonwealth English, and not bothered adding the "except Canada" part, and hoped that readers understood that North American English includes Canada and therefore excludes it from Commonwealth English for that sentence, no source needed, and saved me this 2-hour-long trouble of correcting a small detail on Knowledge (XXG). Man it's frustrating to contribute to this website.
175:
314:
the dispute was resolved. I don't appreciate you misrepresenting my words. Again, you seem to be avoiding my reasoning. Normally an edit war is just two people disagreeing on the words in an edit. In this case someone disagreed with my sourcing, so I added a secondary source. I'm really not sure what
246:
I didn't see this message earlier, sorry for making a message on your talk page. I think you're mistaken, there is no edit war (or at least, there was one, then I complied). I resolved the dispute (despite the demand being unnecessary as it violates no
Knowledge (XXG) policy to use primary sources in
329:
I'll just further add that I took offense to Drmies claiming my edit was "minute and meaningless", and wondering if it "matters at all". Considering the edit I replaced individually listed a dozen or so countries for no apparent reason (I can hypothesize the reason to be wanting to make
America look
276:
Yeah but the dispute wasn't the content of the edit, it was the sourcing, right? So I added the source and now it's resolved. I'm not sure there was any dispute about the edit itself, just that it was "minute". Remember that the prior revision has no sources to back up its claim. I don't want to use
226:
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
185:; 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
291:
Continuing to edit war is not resolving the dispute - reaching agreement on the talk page is the way to do that. If you keep trying to edit war like this and if you refuse to use the talk page because you 'don't want to', your account will almost certainly be blocked.
261:
You are obviously repeating the same edit over and over - changing up the sourcing slightly does not mean you are not edit warring. You need to stop and reach an agreement on the article's associated talk page.
277:
the talk page because I feel this has already been resolved. My edit is sourced, the only dispute has been resolved, and now it should stand, am I right?
39:
157:
124:
63:
71:
247:
this instance). Since I don't want to anger you, I won't revert your revision myself, and instead ask you to do it, thanks in advance.
22:
186:
53:
202:
58:
206:
214:
153:
120:
219:
198:
182:
44:
30:
82:
138:
105:
190:
94:
74:, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Knowledge (XXG). You can visit the
75:
331:
316:
315:
to tell you at this point, you want me to talk to Drmies and see if he's ok with my secondary source?
278:
248:
25:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
34:
194:
93:(~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
297:
267:
236:
145:
112:
86:
223:
193:
among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about
197:. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant
293:
263:
232:
49:
231:—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
174:
136:
Out of curiosity, how did you know that the .css subpages existed so soon?
339:
324:
301:
286:
271:
256:
240:
163:
130:
181:
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an
90:
21:
Hello, Peter Njeim, and welcome to
Knowledge (XXG)! Thank you for
222:, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
306:
I'm not sure I agree with that characterization. I didn't say
173:
103:, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!
99:
213:
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being
205:. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary
148:by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message
115:by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message
229:even if you do not violate the three-revert rule
189:to work toward making a version that represents
8:
98:
310:I "don't want to". I said I don't want to
7:
45:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)
70:You may also want to complete the
14:
59:How to create your first article
218:—especially if you violate the
78:to ask questions or seek help.
40:Contributing to Knowledge (XXG)
100:ask for help on your talk page
1:
340:03:53, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
325:03:41, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
302:03:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
287:03:35, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
272:03:32, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
257:03:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
241:03:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
97:, ask me on my talk page, or
364:
144:If you reply here, please
111:If you reply here, please
64:Simplified Manual of Style
95:Knowledge (XXG):Questions
72:Knowledge (XXG) Adventure
335:
320:
282:
252:
164:19:44, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
131:19:43, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
54:How to develop articles
178:
177:
215:blocked from editing
81:Please remember to
203:dispute resolution
179:
50:How to edit a page
23:your contributions
220:three-revert rule
139:I dream of horses
106:I dream of horses
85:your messages on
355:
195:how this is done
161:
150:
149:
141:
128:
117:
116:
108:
102:
363:
362:
358:
357:
356:
354:
353:
352:
207:page protection
172:
151:
143:
142:
137:
118:
110:
109:
104:
89:by typing four
68:
35:Getting started
19:
12:
11:
5:
361:
359:
351:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
327:
171:
168:
167:
166:
67:
66:
61:
56:
47:
42:
37:
27:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
360:
341:
337:
333:
328:
326:
322:
318:
313:
309:
305:
304:
303:
299:
295:
290:
289:
288:
284:
280:
275:
274:
273:
269:
265:
260:
259:
258:
254:
250:
245:
244:
243:
242:
238:
234:
230:
225:
221:
217:
216:
210:
208:
204:
200:
196:
192:
188:
184:
176:
170:November 2023
169:
165:
159:
155:
147:
140:
135:
134:
133:
132:
126:
122:
114:
107:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
79:
77:
73:
65:
62:
60:
57:
55:
51:
48:
46:
43:
41:
38:
36:
32:
29:
28:
26:
24:
16:
311:
307:
228:
212:
211:
180:
80:
69:
31:Introduction
20:
332:Peter Njeim
317:Peter Njeim
279:Peter Njeim
249:Peter Njeim
199:noticeboard
154:talk to me
121:talk to me
87:talk pages
191:consensus
187:talk page
227:warring—
201:or seek
183:edit war
158:My edits
125:My edits
76:Teahouse
17:Welcome!
312:because
308:because
294:MrOllie
264:MrOllie
233:MrOllie
224:reverts
146:ping me
113:ping me
91:tildes
336:talk
321:talk
298:talk
283:talk
268:talk
253:talk
237:talk
83:sign
52:and
33:and
209:.
162:@
156:) (
129:@
123:) (
338:)
323:)
300:)
285:)
270:)
255:)
239:)
334:(
319:(
296:(
281:(
266:(
251:(
235:(
160:)
152:(
127:)
119:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
