Endless edit/revert cycling on Half Dome
Dear anonymous editor: you are adding material to the Half Dome article that does not follow the guidelines for Wikipedia editing, hence is constantly being reverted. It doesn't matter that you believe going off the cables is safer. It does not matter that Will and I believe this to be false. The important thing about Wikipedia is that the articles are verifiable (that is, any fact can be traced to a reliable source, such as a book or newspaper), and written in a neutral point of view (i.e., does not favor a particular set of opinions).

If you wish to have your material stay in the Half Dome article, you have to come up with a reference that states that it is safer off the cables - you cannot rely on your own knowledge or intuition: you have to prove it to the rest of us. Further, if it is a controversial assertion (which this one is), then you need to phrase it as such. For example, if some association is favoring leaving the cables, then we could add:

Association X claims that leaving the cable is safer than waiting, while the National Park Service wants people to stay on the cable for safety.

Notice that this sort of phrasing does not talk about the absolute truth of whether it is safer or not: it reports who believes it to be safer and who does not. These should be official organizations or well-known experts - we can't cite random people in blogs, for example. Again, both of these assertions should be backed up with references. We can help you format the references, don't worry.

I would urge you to find a reputable source that recommends leaving the cables. Until you do so, I predict that the unsourced assertion is so controversial that it will probably just be reverted on sight.

Feel free to ask any more questions on Talk:Half Dome. Thanks!