Welcome edit

Welcome!

Hello, SwordBrethren, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jojhutton (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Elizabeth I of England edit

Hello. Thanks for your contributions to the Elizabeth I of England article. Where did you get 200 from? Do you have a reference? Thanks,  Davtra  (talk) 01:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Three revert rule edit

Please find the time to read the three revert rule, particularly the part which deals with edit warring over a period greater than 24 hours, before renewing your campaign at Elizabeth I of England. --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:52, 27 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

July 2010 edit

  You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Elizabeth I of England. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. WuhWuzDat 17:50, 27 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Blocked edit

Sorry to see that you fell into the 3rr trap. I hope that this experience does not deter you from contributing, as balance is needed. It would be better if you assembled some references to support your statements. In the talk page you had already cited 200 named martyrs, it is unfortunate that you didn't reference these. Another thought - you said 200, far more that 200 died under Bloody Bess, other editors are, correctly, going to review your precise words. take care. Select references, in this instance seek those that are less catholic (lest they are seen as biased and therefore unreliable). Choose authoritative writers. When others disagree with you, don't just keep reverting, try discussing the issue on the talk page. If they are open to persuasion (and you should listen to their side) an agreed form of words might be found. If not, seek a third opinion. If your sources are solid and your arguments are sound, most editors will, at least, offer some leeway. Remember that on issues such as this, some - including popular published historians - can harbour bias. Take it slowly, have your references to hand, talk rather than revert. Please, don't walk away. - ClemMcGann (talk) 08:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)Reply