User talk:Blaze 007

September 2017

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to United States National Health Care Act, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Reactionary justice warrior

Hello, Blaze 007. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Reactionary justice warrior, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Reactionary justice warrior for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reactionary justice warrior is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactionary justice warrior until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 03:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INTEGRITY

On at least one occasion you inserted claims not supported by the cited sources [1]. The two sources do not mention Friedman at all. Despite the fact he did coin the term "Miracle of Chile", editors are supposed to uphold text–source integrity. --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added a source that does say the FACT that Milton Friedman did in fact coin the term.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaze 007 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]