User talk:GolfGuy7

February 2020

Hello, I'm Angus1986. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Chad Mayes 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 help desk. Thanks. Angus1986 (talk) 15:56, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello- I removed inaccurate information that was sourced to a website/organization that doesn’t exist. How is that not constructive? GolfGuy7 (talk) 16:24, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Hello, I'm Thepenguin9. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Chad Mayes—because it 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 Help desk. Thanks. Thepenguin9 (talk) 01:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- I removed information that was not sourced. The (4) and (5) link do not work. The (6) link refers to the information as alleged and a politically motivated attack, the links in the SacBee article, attempting to backup the authors claims are also dead. This is bad information and shouldn’t be on Wikipedia GolfGuy7 (talk) 02:10, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chad Mayes

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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Meatsgains^(talk) 22:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The information posted on this page is not accurate. It’s not properly sourced and it should be removed. I’ve followed Wikipedia policies and procedures to the letter on this. Please stop spreading false information by continuing to post information that doesn’t meet Wikipedia’s standards. GolfGuy7 (talk) 01:57, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]