User talk:74.134.242.248

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

74.134.242.248, you have been repeatedly edit-warring over insertion of a sentence at Daily Illini regarding an alleged email from the Chancellor. I have removed that sentence. Please do not reinsert it without first addressing the concerns I have raised at Talk:Daily_Illini#November_controversy_and_alleged_email. In addition, please be aware of our rule regarding excessive reversions. Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Finally, welcome to wikipedia.--Kchase T 19:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Please use the talk page to achieve consensus rather than reverting. Reverting doesn't convince anyone. Also, please see WP:ATT for our requirements about WP:V. --Will Beback · † · 00:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -Will Beback · † · 02:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

We've been through this enough times. If you repost the contested line to Daily Illini again without reference to a published source like a newspaper, I will report you for violating 3rr and you will almost certainly be blocked.--Kchase T 03:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Daily Illini

Hey, I haven't been involved in this, but just looking real quick at your contribs, I'd like to note a few things:

  1. There is no cabal.
  2. You've removed some sourced information on party affiliation. I see on the talk page history that there's an issue here, so I'm not sure exactly what's going on, but generally that's a bad idea.
  3. The reference you've provided isn't helpful (i.e., "freedom of information act"). If you could be more specific, so that other people could verify it, that would be nice. Even a copy of the email would help. It would then be easier to allow your inserts. Please see WP:RS - if someone chooses to fight an insertion of yours, you are required to find a reliable source.
  4. Edit warring, especially against the consensus on a talk page is a blockable offense. One needn't necessarily violate WP:3RR. Please wait until the reliable source comes out to reinsert the information, as the talk page indicates. -Patstuarttalk|edits 07:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The role of an encyclopedia

We're not here to record the latest news or items of fleeting interest. We're here to record the core knowledge of the world. If the item you are trying to insert is genuinely important it will still be important in a month, a year, or a decade. By that time secondary sources will have had a chance to report and evaluate the material you're referring to. Until some verfiable source reports on the matter please be patient. -Will Beback · † · 08:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../7/4/2E/User_talk%7E74.134.242.248.html"