User talk:69.255.238.227

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Please note that deletion of substantive contributions to Wikipedia is considered vandalism.

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia
You have recently removed content from Wikipedia without reason, after having already been warned about such behaviour. Please stop now, as further vandalism may result in you being blocked from editing Wikipedia. You are still welcome to (and encouraged to) carry out constructive edits on Wikipedia articles.

Cerberus 17:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Please note that you are welcome to edit content to reflect a more neutral point of view.

That is not what you are doing. You are not permitted to simply delete content. If you believe there is factual error, please be sure identify the error in your edit notes. You are also permitted to add new neutral point of view content. You are NOT permitted to simply delete Wikipedia content: this is vandalism. Presently you continue to violate Wikipedia policy.


Please do not remove content from Wikipedia
You have recently removed content from Wikipedia without reason, after having already been warned about such behaviour. This is now your final warning, and any further vandalism will result in you being blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Cerberus 20:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Blocked for 3 hours

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Húsönd 00:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation to Talk

We have been requested to resolve our content dispute. Please add your comments to the [Silver Chips Talk page]. In particular, please make your content objections clear (where do you find the facts stated to be misleading). Thanks. Cerberus 05:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Second Invitation to Talk

We have been requested to resolve our content dispute. Please add your comments to the [Silver Chips Talk page]. In particular, please make your content objections clear (where do you find the facts stated to be misleading or the point of view expressed not to be neutral). If you have no further objection, a statement to that effect would also be useful. Thanks. Cerberus 02:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re. protection request

Hello and thank you for contacting me. I do protect articles but I cannot get involved in the disputes of the articles that I protect, according to the protection policy. Therefore even if I were to protect Silver Chips Online, it's not up to me to decide which is the "correct" version (unless of course if there's obvious vandalism, which is not the case). It should be noted that Cerberus0 did invite you for talks regarding the content that you dispute, which the proper procedure to resolve them [1]. I strongly suggest that you embrace a civil discussion on the article's talk page. If you can't reach a consensus, you may try dispute resolution procedures such as WP:RFC. I also strongly suggest that you don't resume reverting each other's edits, as that'll lead to another block for violating the WP:3RR and the article be re-protected on any version that might not be the one you support. Regards,--Húsönd 21:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Third Invitation to Talk

Since you deleted the new Silver_Chips_Online section on Gifted and Talented Reporting, I deduce that you must still object to it. I invite you again to explain why at Talk:Silver_Chips_Online.

Please note that a Wikipedia page is not an advertising page. Your objections should involve factual errors or inappropriate point of view. Removal of factually accurate content from Wikipedia is vandalism. I am happy to try to remove any POV problems (indeed I have rewritten the section three times trying to guess your objections). But if your objection is simply to the facts being reported, then removal is i. in conflict with Wikipedia policy, and ii. a poor comment given your connection to a newspaper (indeed, is it in accord with journalistic ethics?).

Please note that I would be quite happy to use another one of Wikipedia's dispute resolution procedures, if you would prefer.

Cerberus 00:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Silver Chips Online

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. Húsönd 03:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Húsönd 05:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Fourth Invitation to Talk

I am glad to see you have stopped wholesale reversion and are now focusing on small edits and POV issues. However we still need to discuss NPOV in some areas. I invite you again to talk at Talk:Silver_Chips_Online, where I have provided some background.

Cerberus 18:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise

You say:

I have presented a compromise. If you are unwilling to compromise, then you leave me no choice but to remove the section altogether.

Those are not words of "compromise" when you edit to impose a nonneutral POV. You also do not have the right to delete in your proposed fashion: that is vandalism.

But it is not a compromise if you will not talk on the talk page about the specific language in dispute. You also sound as if you have not followed the discussion, during which numerous changes were already made as a matter of compromise. Please see the explanation on the page Talk:Silver_Chips_Online.

Cerberus 18:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/9/2E/User_talk%7E69.255.238.227.html"