User talk:172.177.248.14

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Welcome

Hello, 172.177.248.14! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Image:Signature icon.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dreadstar 05:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

[edit] Translation

While I admire the vast amount of content and obvious expertise you bring to the article on Translation, you must work within the bounds of Wikipedia policy and guideline. A number of your edits are disputed, the language has been questioned and sources are needed. You need to communicate with the other editors on the talk page so you can all work together. Dreadstar 05:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I do talk, look at the discussion, indeed. I get no responses other than rogue vandalism.‎ eurominuteman

Yes, I've looked at the discussion, and you'll have to pardon me if I don't quite see where you have tried to cooperate and work with the other editors. I shan't point out some of your more antanogisic comments, but I advise toning down the conversation a bit. No one is here to make a "childish" "dumbed down" article, we're writing for the general reader, not just the professionals in the field. I would strongly suggest you create an ID per Wikipedia:Why create an account, which says:
"You do not need to reveal your offline identity, but having an account gives you a fixed Wikipedia identity that other users will recognize. While we welcome anonymous contributions, logging in under a pseudonym lets you build trust and respect through a history of good edits. It is also easier to communicate and collaborate with an editor if we know who you are (at least, who you are on Wikipedia). It is also easier for veteran users to assume good faith from new users who take the effort to create an account (and you may well become a veteran user yourself some day!). You may well be afforded a great deal less leeway if you do not go to the trouble of making up a username.."
It may help! Dreadstar 06:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Why should formatting issues help? These antangonists are against the structure and content. By the way, I have registered last year, but in this case I choose to remain outside. The scale of psychological resistance against the facts proves the gravity of this choice.

Resistance is futile in the face of well sourced and well written content. This is an open online encyclopedia, and I don't see evidence of any "psychological resistance" against the facts by any of those who are disputing your edits. I would also suggest you review WP:CIV and WP:3RR Dreadstar 06:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that your recent edits to Translation were all reverted. I just glanced through them, not trying to understand the substance of anything. However, I did notice that quite a lot of the comments look like they belong on the talk page. Let me suggest that you put actual editorial changes in the main page, and personal questions or opinions in the talk page. I would also suggest that you follow the citation guidelines - a paraphrase in the main text and a footnote with a reference to the written authority.
I also understand why you may wish to contribute anonymously. Whether you have an ID or not really does not matter, IMHO. What does matter is whether the edits are part of the cooperative effort to produce a readable article. Cbdorsett 07:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I should add that you've been engaging in what is referred to as an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Translation. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 which gains a consensus among editors. Dreadstar 07:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Tell that to the other guys. I get no cooperative discussion responses. They are vandalzing my contributions. Wiki's 5 pillar principles expressively say things do not have to be perfect. These people are the culprits. Formatting issues are not the core reason. These people do not even accept well-written content. They oppose the content and facts. They hide behind formatting issues, in order to avoid delivering content. They now have the reverse burden-of-proof from a content view as i wrote in the discussion.

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 20:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)