User talk:Truthpatrol2

July 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Key Bridge (Washington, D.C.). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 14:49, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from vandalizing Wikipedia via “the malicious removal of encyclopedic content.” The added content was accurate, verifiable and vital historic context that would only be objectionable to white supremacists. Are you a white supremacist? Truthpatrol2 (talk) 15:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Key Bridge (Washington, D.C.). This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dirkbb (talk) 15:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder to cite! Revised and republished. Truthpatrol2 (talk) 16:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Key Bridge (Washington, D.C.) 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please use the Talk page to discuss your changes. Schazjmd (talk) 17:19, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this information Schazjmd! I will seek consensus.

@Truthpatrol2: and yet, you didn't. Schazjmd (talk) 17:55, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shazjmd I chose to first try compromise by deleting the word "sadly" and posting an explanation. I am now getting an objection to verifiable historical information so I will open a Talk page seeking consensus. Do I need to invite people via a particular process or just open the page? New and learning. Thanks!

@Truthpatrol2: start a discussion on Talk:Key Bridge (Washington, D.C.). Editors who watch the article will see it. If you want, you can invite discussion from the editors who reverted your edits by including their names in your talk page post as follows: {{ping|user name}}. You must sign your post for the "ping" to work. Every time you post on a talk page, end your post with ~~~~, that will automatically sign your post. Schazjmd (talk) 18:12, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Key Bridge (Washington, D.C.). Serols (talk) 17:48, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sign your posts

None of the pings that you added to Talk:Key Bridge (Washington, D.C.) worked because you did not sign your post. Every time you post on a talk page, end your post with ~~~~ to automatically sign your post. Schazjmd (talk) 18:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the guidance @Schazjmd. I had tried but think I got it figured now. Is there an easy reply button to these user talk chats and those on the talk page without having to "edit source?"

You just forgot to sign again.

There's a user script you can install that will add reply links on talk pages, see the instructions here. Schazjmd (talk) 19:22, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]