User talk:2601:40:CE00:1590:24F6:A73A:9F20:74C: Difference between revisions

December 2024

Hello, I'm CipherRephic. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Warburg effect (oncology) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. CR (talk) 17:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

The citation to the article by DR Grimes et al. and their opinion on low carb diets is "not constructive." If you are going to get into the realm of opinion either this doesn't belong or it should be accompanies by the work of Seyfried et al. Unless I'm banned by Wiki, I plan on from time to time checking in and making editorial changes as I see fit. 2601:40:CE00:1590:24F6:A73A:9F20:74C (talk) 18:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Warburg effect (oncology), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. CR (talk) 17:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I've given valid reasons. The conclusion by Grimes et al. are highly contentious. They either shouldn't be featured. Or if they are should be accompanies by those of Seyfried et al. 2601:40:CE00:1590:24F6:A73A:9F20:74C (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi 2601:40:CE00:1590:24F6:A73A:9F20:74C! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Warburg effect (oncology) several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Warburg effect (oncology), please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Bowler the Carmine | talk 18:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your recent editing history at Warburg effect (oncology) 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Bowler the Carmine | talk 18:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Bowler the Carmine | talk 21:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)