User talk:Johnnybgood999

Welcome!

Hi Johnnybgood999! 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! :Jay8g [V•T•E] 05:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
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.

:Jay8g [V•T•E] 05:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Antifeminism. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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 and 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. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 17:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sangdeboeuf Your assessment does not align with the events. The only editor who expressed disagreements was you, as can be seen on the talk page of the cited article. Specifically, in response to your comment about the need to add more secondary and tertiary sources, they were added (ex). Far from any alleged edit war or lack of consensus, what exists is collaboration and efforts to enrich the article. The only disruptive event happened when you decided to remove one-third of the article's content simply because you deemed it necessary to add more primary sources (you didn't even specify exactly which paragraphs you were referring to). In fact, I didn't delete any users' contributions.

I've never been involved in any edit war, as you can see on my user page and the talk section of this article. Unlike your user page, which seems to be more controversial.

In any case, I remain available for discussions and constructive criticism.

Best regards. Johnnybgood999 (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]