User talk:TacoBruno
September 2024
[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Durek Verrett have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place
{{Help me}}on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. - The following is the log entry regarding this message: Durek Verrett was changed by TacoBruno (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.855962 on 2024-09-18T14:31:17+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Durek Verrett, you may be blocked from editing. Please discuss on the article's talk page and acquire consensus before removing significant portions of sourced content. Alith Anar 16:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- We have an obligation to remove slanderous content originally extracted from tabloids do we not? What you are doing is proving a suspicion I had that individuals or an individual is targeting this page looking to defame. TacoBruno (talk) 16:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, I am not targeting any page, I conducting recent changes patrol. Other editors and I are encouraging editors to acquire consensus before making significant changes to articles. This is especially important on biographies of living persons. We encourage you to discuss your edits on Talk:Durek Verrett and collaborate with other editors, as the edits in question involve removal of large amounts of sourced content. Alith Anar 16:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- I am ok with discussions but even reading the Talk page it is insanely obvious that there are individuals targeting him. Have you not seen it or read some of the responses for yourself? TacoBruno (talk) 16:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Another important Wikipedia's code of conduct is to remain civil and assume good faith. Instead of accusing everyone who disagrees or reverts edits as "targeting," try remaining civil and paying attention to Wikipedia policies. Failure to do so may result in being blocked. Alith Anar 16:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Again I am not the only one who is claiming that this article is clearly being used in bad faith as seen in the talk forum. I am under the assumption that correcting bad faith is indeed good faith? Is Wikipedias policy to remove slander and libelous accusations? TacoBruno (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, what I was saying was to stop accusing any and all editors as "targeting" the page. Assuming good faith means automatically assuming that editors are trying their best to improve the encyclopedia, despite disagreements or mistakes. It's not going to convince people to agree with major edits if one instantly accuses people of "targeting" simply for disagreeing or reverting. Alith Anar 16:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Please read the Talk section and you will see that there are other claims of "targeting". You have three primary people who seem to act in bad faith. Should this not be discussed?
- Id like to clarify that my use of targeting was not directed at any one individual but again it does reek of a concerted effort. Is pointing that out acting in bad faith? TacoBruno (talk) 17:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, what I was saying was to stop accusing any and all editors as "targeting" the page. Assuming good faith means automatically assuming that editors are trying their best to improve the encyclopedia, despite disagreements or mistakes. It's not going to convince people to agree with major edits if one instantly accuses people of "targeting" simply for disagreeing or reverting. Alith Anar 16:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Again I am not the only one who is claiming that this article is clearly being used in bad faith as seen in the talk forum. I am under the assumption that correcting bad faith is indeed good faith? Is Wikipedias policy to remove slander and libelous accusations? TacoBruno (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Another important Wikipedia's code of conduct is to remain civil and assume good faith. Instead of accusing everyone who disagrees or reverts edits as "targeting," try remaining civil and paying attention to Wikipedia policies. Failure to do so may result in being blocked. Alith Anar 16:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- I am ok with discussions but even reading the Talk page it is insanely obvious that there are individuals targeting him. Have you not seen it or read some of the responses for yourself? TacoBruno (talk) 16:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, I am not targeting any page, I conducting recent changes patrol. Other editors and I are encouraging editors to acquire consensus before making significant changes to articles. This is especially important on biographies of living persons. We encourage you to discuss your edits on Talk:Durek Verrett and collaborate with other editors, as the edits in question involve removal of large amounts of sourced content. Alith Anar 16:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
If you want to remove the referenced information, rather than edit warring, you need to discuss this at the article talk page. Thank you! Knitsey (talk) 15:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- I am not edit warring I am removing slanderous content. Its information first extracted from tabloids. If it gets placed back it sort of confirms my suspicion of people purposefully targeting a page. TacoBruno (talk) 16:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)