User talk:BrownBeretLaCausa

→== March 2018 ==

Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare. I noticed that in this edit to Brown Berets, 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. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:24, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit

The subject was removed due to true history of the movement. As told by old male and female veterans of the Brown Berets and as how they are wrote through books within history. I made a removed false content that can bring false accusation and false rumors withing the movement. True history os the key to true knowledge. Thank you for your time and will write a summary. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 18:28, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

The content that you removed is well-supported by reliable sources—if it is inaccurate you will need to provide your own similarly reliable sources to show this is the case. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Brown Berets. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Please review citations.

Those citation have nothing to do with the Brown Berets. Please reverse edit and replace on what i had removed. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 19:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Resolution

Can you please remove the false content based on "Women and machismo in the movement" that was added by boricuaxicana. As soon as possible. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 19:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

The arbitration enforcement noticeboard is only for enforcement of remedies put in place by the arbitration committee. Since you did not allege a violation of any specific arbitration remedy, I have removed your posting there. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018

Your recent editing history at Brown Berets shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 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. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Fix false statements.

No resolution has been done. I have talked and no one answers. I am always willing to talk truth. Do your job right. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 03:49, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Think of each page on Wikipedia like a room in a museum. You've been sitting in your office (this page), talking to yourself, when you should have gone to Talk:Brown Berets. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement would be like the HR or security office, not the place to sort out what to do about the Brown Berets page. Per WP:BRD, starting a conversation there was your job. Per WP:BURDEN, it's also your job to cite professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that support the changes you'd like to see.

Don't tell people "do your job right" when you're the one who has been going about things the wrong way this whole time. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:08, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok

By doing job right i mean on by working on resolution for adding correct information. So far no one has reply to me on working a resolution on fixing this false statements. I am a memeber of the Brown Berets. Yes i am going to take an offense for false information. I would i appreciate a bit of help on fixing this issue. I have tried to fix it but keeps on getting reverse. The citations that where put there have nothing to do with the Brown Berets. I was just correcting a mistake. I wouldn't like to see a "Museum" with false information. So i really appreciate any help i could get from correcting the mistake. Thats all i have been asking. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 04:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

As a member of the Brown Berets, you have a conflict of interest and should review our policy on editing with a conflict of interest. In short, you should not edit any article relating to the Brown Berets, but should request edits on the article's talk page (not your own user page). Ian.thomson (talk) 15:41, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Just forget it.

If i make a mistake on correcting just please explain to me on how to fix it the right way. I would like to avoid this from happening again. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 04:50, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok

Ok thank you for your time. Good day. BrownBeretLaCausa (talk) 17:02, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Brown Berets, you may be blocked from editing. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)