User talk:213.146.142.131

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can you explain why you keep trying to add unverified statements which conflict with sources into the English Democrats article? --SandyDancer 17:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The English Democrats is the largest English Nationalist Party

- please prove otherwise

The membershiship is currently closer to 1,500 then 1,000

- please prove otherwise

No. It is not up to me to prove you are incorrect. It is up to you to prove you are correct. --SandyDancer 19:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Warning

Do not continue to add unsourced information, and do not make personal attacks like you did here[1] in your edit summary or you will banned from editing Wikipedia by an Administrator. You have been warned. --SandyDancer 19:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You really should stop calling other people idiots, you may be blocked from editing if you do. 66.231.130.70 11:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Further warning - edits to English Democrats, personal attacks

Today you have continued to make the same edits without offering sources, and have again breached the prohibition on making personal attacks. If you do this again I will be reporting you to an administrator. Please stop. If you have information about the subject of this article and/or feel the article is incorrect as it is, please discuss on the talk page and you will be listened to. --SandyDancer 11:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Verifiability on Wikipedia

I note that you have said in an edit summary here "Source English Democrats Membership Secretary - e-mail Membership@EngDem.org for confirmaition". The problem is that information placed in articles needs to adhere to Wikipedia's rules on verifiability, and you will see here this in a nutshell this means "that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source". Saying someone can email an individual is not sufficient. Original research - meaning material that has not been published by a reliable source - is not permissible on Wikipedia. If, for example, the party website for the English Democrats was to state its membership levels, it would be permissible to say "the party claims a membership of X". If that was independently verified by a third party source, you could say "the party has a membership of X". But saying that anyone who wants to check can ask the membership secretary is not good enough. Also note that it appears you have conflict of interest here - please correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that you are a member or officer of this party. You should note the policy of neutral point of view at all times. --SandyDancer 19:15, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to European Parliament election, 2009

Your recent edit to European Parliament election, 2009 (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 15:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)