| Revision as of 17:47, 18 October 2008 editPhirazo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,917 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:04, 18 October 2008 edit undoEveryme (talk | contribs)3,624 edits Warning: Potentially violating the three revert rule on Zeitgeist: Addendum. // TWNext edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| Also, please remember that ] are considered disruptive and that you should take your concerns to ], instead of continually reverting. I would like to point out the ], which states that "Contributors '''must not''' perform '''more than three''' reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period, whether or not the edits involve the same material, except in certain circumstances." (emphasis original). Failure to follow this rule can lead to a ]. Thanks, --] (]) 17:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC) | Also, please remember that ] are considered disruptive and that you should take your concerns to ], instead of continually reverting. I would like to point out the ], which states that "Contributors '''must not''' perform '''more than three''' reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period, whether or not the edits involve the same material, except in certain circumstances." (emphasis original). Failure to follow this rule can lead to a ]. Thanks, --] (]) 17:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == October 2008 == | |||
| ] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{#if:Zeitgeist: Addendum|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, '''you may be ] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> <span style="font-family:lucida sans, console;">''''']'''''</span> 18:04, 18 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:04, 18 October 2008
Welcome!
Hello, Stanazollo, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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 Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!
Zeitgeist: Addendum
RE : Please do not reply to a hidden editing notice within that notice. Take it to the article talk page. And, yes: Such a qualifying assertion about the Venus Project does most definitely need a reliable, third-party source attached to it. Also note that neither original research nor non-neutral editing is gladly suffered on Misplaced Pages. Just saying, on the assumption that you don't know these things yet. Everyme 17:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Please stop. Alex Jones is not a reliable source for that claim. Everyme 15:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
only account?
Considering the very long streak of absence of this account, I wonder if you have any other accounts? If so, please note that the fact should be clearly and prominently stated on this account's main user page. Everyme 14:18, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Re: Zeitgeist: Addendum
Hello, I have noticed your edits to Zeitgeist: Addendum, mainly the assertion that the "Venus Project", which is promoted by the film, is communist. The Venus Project itself doesn't describe itself as communist , so it can't just be asserted that it is. These claims need to be properly attributed, not just in footnotes, but in the main text. Also, Alex Jones (radio) is only a reliable source for what Alex Jones says. He is a conspiracy nut, through and through. In the clip you give, he claims makes extraordinary claims about evil cabals and other such nonsense.
Also, please remember that edit wars are considered disruptive and that you should take your concerns to Talk:Zeitgeist: Addendum, instead of continually reverting. I would like to point out the three-revert rule, which states that "Contributors must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period, whether or not the edits involve the same material, except in certain circumstances." (emphasis original). Failure to follow this rule can lead to a block from editing. Thanks, --Phirazo (talk) 17:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
October 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Zeitgeist: Addendum. 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 a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Everyme 18:04, 18 October 2008 (UTC)