User talk:82.33.72.42

Edit-warring on Elections in Cuba

Your recent editing history 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read wp:brd and wp:consensus.Slatersteven (talk) 18:07, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have. It seems the requirement for a consensus only applies to me, though. 82.33.72.42 (talk) 18:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest you do not try and dismiss users or edits as being some kind of capitalist lap dog imperialism or whatever (read wp:soap). You removed sourced content, sources to very good RS. It is down to you to make a valid (policy-based) case as to why they are not RS.Slatersteven (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And yet it is acceptable for others to accuse me of supporting fringe theories? I removed no sourced content, I merely properly contextualised and presented other sources for balance. I will admit to my own biases but I am endeavouring to make non-partisan edits, the same cannot be said of other users. 82.33.72.42 (talk) 18:49, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You removed sources and placed a +CN tag, and yes you did remove contact such as "elections are are nominated by organs that are firmly controlled by the Communist Party of Cuba.".Slatersteven (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me what sources I removed? Adding a citation needed tag to unsourced content is not allowed now? Also, I did not remove "elections are are nominated by organs that are firmly controlled by the Communist Party of Cuba." If you look at my last revision (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elections_in_Cuba&oldid=1037456217) at the end of the second paragraph I have "others have argued that despite public participation the local organisations and electoral committees responsible for candidate nomination remain firmly controlled by the Communist Party of Cuba." with the same citations given by Snoogans. I reworked it slightly to flow better but the content is the same. Please apologise for this false accusation. 82.33.72.42 (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.