Beyond My Ken (talk | contribs) |
David.thompson.esq (talk | contribs) →Rock Hudson: new section |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Your editing== |
==Your editing== |
||
Practically every edit you've made in your brief career here has been to either add your own opinion about something, with no source, or to remove sourced information, because you don't agree with it. I suggest that you read some Wikipedia policies to get a better handle on how we operate here. First, all information must be [[WP:V|verifiable]], using citations from [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. When information is properly sourced, do not remove it without first discussion the deletion and getting a [[WP:CONSENSUS|consensus]] to do so. Second, things that you just "know" to be true aren't acceptable to be added to articles, we call it [[WP:OR|original research]]. Finally, Wikipedia is to be edited with a [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]]; please leave your personal prejudices at the door, they're not wanted here.<p>In a small number of edits, you have managed to break each one of these policies several times - please do not do so again. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 00:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC) |
Practically every edit you've made in your brief career here has been to either add your own opinion about something, with no source, or to remove sourced information, because you don't agree with it. I suggest that you read some Wikipedia policies to get a better handle on how we operate here. First, all information must be [[WP:V|verifiable]], using citations from [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. When information is properly sourced, do not remove it without first discussion the deletion and getting a [[WP:CONSENSUS|consensus]] to do so. Second, things that you just "know" to be true aren't acceptable to be added to articles, we call it [[WP:OR|original research]]. Finally, Wikipedia is to be edited with a [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]]; please leave your personal prejudices at the door, they're not wanted here.<p>In a small number of edits, you have managed to break each one of these policies several times - please do not do so again. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 00:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Rock Hudson == |
|||
You have ignored my polite requests to make your case for the revision you want to make on the talk page of the article, where there is a pending request for comment. Your comment, if you choose to provide it, could be the one that inspires a consensus that you are right and that the material you don't like should be deleted. What you are doing now is edit warring and is not acceptable. This is your warning that your edit warring will now be reported. You should go back to the page, remove your own most recent edit, and then explain on the talk page in the rfc why the disputed edit you want to make is an improvement. So far, your edit summaries have been flippant and conclusory, and have not explained anything. [[User:David.thompson.esq|David.thompson.esq]] ([[User talk:David.thompson.esq|talk]]) 04:47, 15 April 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:47, 15 April 2014
Your editing
Practically every edit you've made in your brief career here has been to either add your own opinion about something, with no source, or to remove sourced information, because you don't agree with it. I suggest that you read some Wikipedia policies to get a better handle on how we operate here. First, all information must be verifiable, using citations from reliable sources. When information is properly sourced, do not remove it without first discussion the deletion and getting a consensus to do so. Second, things that you just "know" to be true aren't acceptable to be added to articles, we call it original research. Finally, Wikipedia is to be edited with a neutral point of view; please leave your personal prejudices at the door, they're not wanted here.
In a small number of edits, you have managed to break each one of these policies several times - please do not do so again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Rock Hudson
You have ignored my polite requests to make your case for the revision you want to make on the talk page of the article, where there is a pending request for comment. Your comment, if you choose to provide it, could be the one that inspires a consensus that you are right and that the material you don't like should be deleted. What you are doing now is edit warring and is not acceptable. This is your warning that your edit warring will now be reported. You should go back to the page, remove your own most recent edit, and then explain on the talk page in the rfc why the disputed edit you want to make is an improvement. So far, your edit summaries have been flippant and conclusory, and have not explained anything. David.thompson.esq (talk) 04:47, 15 April 2014 (UTC)