User talk:75.41.245.253

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  • It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. —Khoikhoi 00:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. —Khoikhoi 01:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Iranian peoples. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —Khoikhoi 03:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --—Khoikhoi 03:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


From Wikipedia:Vandalism: Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism.

SO STOP SENDING ME MESSAGES. IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THE DEFINITION I'M OFFERING YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVERT IT. OTHERWISE STOP CALLING IT VANDALISM JUST BECAUSE YOU DONT LIKE IT.

The current definition in the article is the result of many archives of discussion, please see Talk:Iranian peoples for more background. Such unilteral changes will be reverted, unless you make an effort to discuss your changes. Again, please do not remove sourced information. —Khoikhoi 03:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't care if my edits are reverted. But you have no right to call them vandalism as I'm working in good faith. If you disagree you can revert. But you cannot tell me I have to agree with your point of view or else I'm doing "vandalism".