User talk:Netmapper

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Williams Landing railway station". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 20:40, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Your recent editing history at Williams Landing railway station shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 05:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently in response to this. Someone started to reverse edits before it's been resolved.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Netmapper (talk • contribs)

No, it's in response to your reinsertion of unsourced material. Please see our WP:V policy. Unsourced material can be removed by any editor. It is the resposibility of the inserting editor to provide sources verifying the facts before reinstating. If you persist, you will be blocked.

Besides the verifiablility question, your material is problematic because it is giving an opinion in Wikipedia's voice. This is contrary to our WP:NPOV policy. As Mendaliv explained to you on the article talk page opinions must be sourced and attributed, not stated as fact. Spinning Spark 08:09, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please take note of this: you just posted above without signing. I am beginning to think that you are deliberately not signing. Not doing so is problematic, especially on busy community pages. The flow of the conversation can be hard to read and it can cause failure of automatic archiving and other automated processes that rely on date stamps. Spinning Spark 08:14, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

JavaScript RegExp problem

I noticed you have experience in JavaScript. I'm hoping you can help me with a problem I've run into writing a userscript.

Please see my post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject JavaScript#Nested RegExp.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 12:23, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]