The motto of the mongoose family is "Run and find out."
Scam Watch
Warning: There is an on-going scam targeting people who would like Wikipedia to have an article about them. See this scam warning for detailed information. If you've been scammed please send details to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org to help others who could be future victims of this scam.
This editor is a Looshpah Laureate of the Encyclopedia and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge with Secret Appendix, Errata Sheet, and Author's Signature.
Admin statistics
Action
Count
Edits
81468
Edits+Deleted
83748
Pages deleted
108
Revisions deleted
39
Pages restored
5
Pages protected
178
Pages unprotected
8
Protections modified
30
Users blocked
375
Users reblocked
35
Users unblocked
37
User rights modified
12
Users created
1
I love Wikipedia and have been editing for years; for nearly a decade, I edited without logging in unless making a particular edit required me to do so. I'm particularly interested in food issues, including local artisanal foods, food writers, and food history, and in biographies and works of women and people of color, but on a regular basis some other topic sets off an edit binge.
I have an alt account User:TrainerValereee which I created so I could demonstrate editing without all the extra buttons.
{{subst:Uw-ewsoft|Article|Additional text}} produces Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Article. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page. If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Additional text
interwiki links: prepend a colon and the abbreviation for the applicable project (as defined in meta:Interwiki map), so for example you can link c:Commons:Download tools like [[:c:Commons:Download tools]]
PSHAW hanging up: if you get a PSHAW error (hopefully you're on chrome), hit "inspect", go to "console", and copy/paste whatever error message you're gettin' there.
.jpg){kind=small}
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Article. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page. If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Additional text
