User talk:Maurnxiao

Welcome!

Hi Maurnxiao! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! NoonIcarus (talk) 21:03, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Maurnxiao (talk) 21:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Harry S. Truman. Accusing another editor of "deliberate erasue(sic) of highly important historical context" indicates you are not assuming good faith. Please familiarize yourself with our policies that likely required the the content be removed, and discuss with the editor on the article's Talk page if you have questions about their reasoning. General Ization ^Talk 02:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, the "deliberate" came prematurely, and sorry for the spelling mistake in 'erasure' too. Maurnxiao (talk) 02:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far, none of the sources for the content you are edit warring over appear to suggest that Harry Truman personally caused, implemented or was responsible for the misbehavior of the South Koreans, even if it occurred with knowledge and approval of parties within the US government. Since the sources you cite do not mention Truman, they could not be making the argument that Truman was responsible or even necessarily aware of those events. Consequently, the claim you are implicitly making by adding this content to an article about Truman is not supported by the sources. This information exists and belongs elsewhere in Wikipedia, but it does not appear to belong here. And even if it does, you must not edit war over it. General Ization ^Talk 02:29, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not reverted more than four times which I believe is the limit. Truman, as President, was Commander-in-Chief, and the US perpetrated atrocities which are not mentioned in the article. Truman authorized the bombardment of North Korea which killed possibly more than a million and a half people. Omitting this from the article would detrimental and not provide a balanced account of Truman's actions. There is even a citation in the Bombing of North Korea article that says Truman ordered MacArthur to begin the bombing of North Korea. Maurnxiao (talk) 02:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "limit" is 3 times, but you may be blocked for conducting an edit war even if less than that. When you note that others reject your edit, your response should be to discuss it on the article Talk page (without making the same change again), not to repeatedly assert your change. See the several links I have given you now to our policies. General Ization ^Talk 02:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sources were provided. Maurnxiao (talk) 02:43, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources do not mention Truman. This discussion belongs now on the article Talk page, not here. General Ization ^Talk 02:44, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Truman was the Commander-in-Chief and bore responsibility for the atrocities committed by the US. Maurnxiao (talk) 02:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that your arguments for including mention of this at Harry Truman are right, but that you need to locate reliable sources that explicitly make the connections you are implicitly making to Truman. You may not make those connections without citing sources that support them. (See WP:OR and WP:SYNTH.) Also, your arguments belong on the article's Talk page where they can be discussed with others, not in your edit summaries. General Ization ^Talk 02:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Harry S. Truman 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. General Ization ^Talk 02:43, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just reiterate what User:General Ization said: edit warring is really about an attitude, not about a number. I actually got close to blocking you already. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a pointless comment and it feels like it was made to intimidate me out of this discussion. I find it a dereliction of duty to not mention the atrocities committed by the US under Truman's command, some authorized directly by him, in an article about Truman. Maurnxiao (talk) 02:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]