| Revision as of 22:56, 18 March 2007 editBobblehead (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users35,705 edits →to dereks1x re []: message on Talk:Barack Obama← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:01, 18 March 2007 edit undoJersyko (talk | contribs)14,671 edits Edit warring, POV pushing, civilityNext edit → | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
| Dereks1x - I am sure you mean well in your editing of ], but there is a problem with the way you are doing it. Some of your edits are not careful, and introduce errors in language and wording; some of them are taking an article that many editors have worked hard to keep NPOV and making it less so. Also the article has been given featured status, and we have recently undergone a review of that featured status, and one of the criteria is stability - that means, once wording has been established for sections that are not current events, for example, editors are supposed to try to keep that wording as it is without making lots of changes. His early life, for example, has been gone over and over and the wording is fair, accurate, and not changing, so there's no need to edit it further beyond an occasional tweak. Also the reference style has been under scrutiny and editors have worked hard to keep it consistent and in compliance with standards. PLease believe me when I tell you that the regular editors on this article are diligent and non-partisan. We're not pushing any agenda, pro or anti the Senator regarding his Presidential ambition. What we want is for there to be a fair article, with a reasonable level of detail but not too much - that's another issue in Featured status - with reliable references, and a consistent style. If anyone has ideas for additions or major changes, we try to discuss them on the Talk page before implementing them. I'm asking you, then, to do that. I'm speaking for myself here - as one editor of the page - and one of the ones who has reverted some of your multiple edits yesterday and today. It's very time consuming to do this over and over - you are today reinstating things that were removed yesterday. Please stop doing that and come over to talk instead and say why you think your changes are needed, and I assure you that fair changes will get a fair hearing. I'm posting this on your user talk page and on ] where it can be discussed more. I hope you don't take offense, and I hope you will be a cooperative editor on this highly-visible featured article. Thank you. <strong>] </strong>|<small> ]</small> 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | Dereks1x - I am sure you mean well in your editing of ], but there is a problem with the way you are doing it. Some of your edits are not careful, and introduce errors in language and wording; some of them are taking an article that many editors have worked hard to keep NPOV and making it less so. Also the article has been given featured status, and we have recently undergone a review of that featured status, and one of the criteria is stability - that means, once wording has been established for sections that are not current events, for example, editors are supposed to try to keep that wording as it is without making lots of changes. His early life, for example, has been gone over and over and the wording is fair, accurate, and not changing, so there's no need to edit it further beyond an occasional tweak. Also the reference style has been under scrutiny and editors have worked hard to keep it consistent and in compliance with standards. PLease believe me when I tell you that the regular editors on this article are diligent and non-partisan. We're not pushing any agenda, pro or anti the Senator regarding his Presidential ambition. What we want is for there to be a fair article, with a reasonable level of detail but not too much - that's another issue in Featured status - with reliable references, and a consistent style. If anyone has ideas for additions or major changes, we try to discuss them on the Talk page before implementing them. I'm asking you, then, to do that. I'm speaking for myself here - as one editor of the page - and one of the ones who has reverted some of your multiple edits yesterday and today. It's very time consuming to do this over and over - you are today reinstating things that were removed yesterday. Please stop doing that and come over to talk instead and say why you think your changes are needed, and I assure you that fair changes will get a fair hearing. I'm posting this on your user talk page and on ] where it can be discussed more. I hope you don't take offense, and I hope you will be a cooperative editor on this highly-visible featured article. Thank you. <strong>] </strong>|<small> ]</small> 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :I left a note on , regarding my removal of your addition to the legislative section of the article. Please respond on the article's talk page, not here. --] 22:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | :I left a note on , regarding my removal of your addition to the legislative section of the article. Please respond on the article's talk page, not here. --] 22:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == Edit warring, POV pushing, civility == | |||
| Please remain ], refrain from ] by discussing edits on article talk pages, and ensure that your edits adhere to ] and are ] to ]. If you persist in incivility and edit warring, you will be ] from editing. Thank you. · '''<font color="#709070">]</font>''' ''<font color="#007BA7" size="1">]</font>'' · 23:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:01, 18 March 2007
Welcome
Hello, Dereks1x, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Geniac 18:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Preview
Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. --Geniac 19:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Last edit to Barack Obama deleted cited material
When material is cited, you need to find a counterpoint. Deleting paragraphs with cited material need discussion on the talkpage for consensus. Ronbo76 20:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
March 2007
Edits to Barack Obama of material with citations
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from an article. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Misplaced Pages without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ronbo76 20:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please discuss on talkpage. Further deletions of cited material is inappropriate. Ronbo76 20:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Second edit to Barack Obama of material with citations
Please do not delete content from articles on Misplaced Pages. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ronbo76 20:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Please do not use userpages like mine for comment which should go on a talkpage
No double standard involved. Your deletions are throwing off the POV of the article. You need to discuss your intentions fully on the talkpage before deleting cited material. If need be, introduce a new paragraph that is a counterpoint with citations. Ronbo76 20:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
to dereks1x re Barack Obama
Dereks1x - I am sure you mean well in your editing of Barack Obama, but there is a problem with the way you are doing it. Some of your edits are not careful, and introduce errors in language and wording; some of them are taking an article that many editors have worked hard to keep NPOV and making it less so. Also the article has been given featured status, and we have recently undergone a review of that featured status, and one of the criteria is stability - that means, once wording has been established for sections that are not current events, for example, editors are supposed to try to keep that wording as it is without making lots of changes. His early life, for example, has been gone over and over and the wording is fair, accurate, and not changing, so there's no need to edit it further beyond an occasional tweak. Also the reference style has been under scrutiny and editors have worked hard to keep it consistent and in compliance with standards. PLease believe me when I tell you that the regular editors on this article are diligent and non-partisan. We're not pushing any agenda, pro or anti the Senator regarding his Presidential ambition. What we want is for there to be a fair article, with a reasonable level of detail but not too much - that's another issue in Featured status - with reliable references, and a consistent style. If anyone has ideas for additions or major changes, we try to discuss them on the Talk page before implementing them. I'm asking you, then, to do that. I'm speaking for myself here - as one editor of the page - and one of the ones who has reverted some of your multiple edits yesterday and today. It's very time consuming to do this over and over - you are today reinstating things that were removed yesterday. Please stop doing that and come over to talk instead and say why you think your changes are needed, and I assure you that fair changes will get a fair hearing. I'm posting this on your user talk page and on Talk:Barack Obama where it can be discussed more. I hope you don't take offense, and I hope you will be a cooperative editor on this highly-visible featured article. Thank you. Tvoz | talk 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- I left a note on Obama's talkpage, regarding my removal of your addition to the legislative section of the article. Please respond on the article's talk page, not here. --Bobblehead 22:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Edit warring, POV pushing, civility
Please remain civil, refrain from edit warring by discussing edits on article talk pages, and ensure that your edits adhere to neutral point of view and are attributable to reliable sources. If you persist in incivility and edit warring, you will be blocked from editing. Thank you. · j e r s y k o talk · 23:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)