User talk:71.103.137.29

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] VVPAT

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Electiontechnology 00:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors.

[edit] Update

Please understand that your edits are incorrect. You have been notified of this.

  1. Your edits are in the wrong place. Eliminating the header of the article does not improve the article.
  2. Your edits are not exactly correct. There are a number of different types of VVPATs and they do not all follow your description.
  3. Your edits are largely duplicated in the "VVPAT Application" section.
  4. Your edit "VVPAT is not a substitute for any type of paper ballot." is commentary and not suitable for an encyclopedia.

You are in violation of the Wikipedia Three-revert rule as you have be notified and ignored. I am referring you to an administrator who can hopefully solve this problem.

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR for my referral to admins. --Electiontechnology 19:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing behaviour

I have looked into the report mentioned above and decided that you have not actually broken the three revert rule. However, you were editing disruptively and I am concerned about your editing. It is important, if you have a dispute over a page on wikipedia, to discuss the matter with other editors and not simply change back to your preferred version; you can be blocked from editing even if you do not break the three revert rule.

You only seem to have edited this page, and having looked at your edits it seems that they were designed to promote a particular opinion about the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail. The approach which Wikipedia strives for is called neutral point of view, in which all significant points of view about a subject are discussed in the article, but none are endorsed by it. If you keep to this approach you are unlikely to encounter problems. Sam Blacketer 00:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)