60.240.183.28

October 2016

Hello, I'm Marchjuly. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Kelly McGillis, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

plenty of sources if you just looked (which you are meant to do, not just blindly remove content) http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/flyer.do?personId=35543 http://people.com/archive/cover-story-memoir-of-a-brief-time-in-hell-vol-30-no-20/ http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/top-gun-rapist-50-taxpayers-bought-sex-fiend-viagra-court-told-article-1.638221— Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.183.28 (talk) 16:54, 12 October 2016 (UTC+9)

If there are plenty of sources, then you should add them which is what you are required to do. If you're not sure how to properly add a source, then ask for assistance on the article's talk page or read Wikipedia:references for beginners. Moreover, the fact that something is true and can be supported by a citation does not automatically guarantee such content should be added to the article. If the information is removed by another editor, you should try to discuss things on the article talk page instead of immediately re-adding it to avoid edit warring. Start a discussion at Talk:Kelly McGillis and see if you can establish a consensus for adding this information to the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:24, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Kelly McGillis 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 article's 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Please note that you attempts to add this content has also been reverted by NorthBySouthBaranof and {[u|IdreamofJeanie}] which indicates that the edit you're trying to make is contentious. Please follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and initiate discussion on the article's talk page to try and establish a consensus for inclusion. All you have to do explain why this content should be added in terms of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and see if others agree with you. However, continuing to try and force the information into the article (regardless of whether it is true) is likely going to lead to an administrator being asked to intervene. Also, please note that per WP:NOT3RR, removing BLP violations are not considered to be a 3RR violation and I feel reverting this type of edit qualifies for that exemption. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:37, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kelly McGillis. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 08:51, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Vanamonde (talk) 09:11, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

---