User talk:Dave7777777

Welcome!

Hello, Dave7777777, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ian.thomson (talk) 02:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. McSly (talk) 14:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring report

Hello, I have reported you for sustained edit warring at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Dave7777777 reported by User:Nick-D (Result: ) Nick-D (talk) 23:35, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A summary of some guidelines you may find useful

"Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, using <ref>reference tags like this</ref>, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources. Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for.

Ian.thomson (talk) 02:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the complaint about your edits at WP:AN3

Please see this result which contains a warning for you not to continue reverting at Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel. EdJohnston (talk) 02:01, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your feedback

If you see a mistake, I suggest you be bold and fix it.

Buggie111 (talk) 04:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To further that comment, if someone reverts your bold edit then the bold, revert, discuss cycle comes into play, try not to engage in futile edit warring. Remember that Wikipedia must remain neutral, it is possible to discuss any problem edits at the neutral point of view noticeboard. If you think that a source is reliable, try to gain consensus for it at the reliable sources noticboard. Mattg82 (talk) 19:12, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]