User talk:Mxsla

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 October 2007 2 Satamkar 3 November 2007 4 SATAMKAR

[edit] October 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Satamkar, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Gscshoyru 01:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Satamkar

As you may have missed my explanation on the talk page following your inquiry, and continue to sign the Satamkar article in violation of Wikipedia guidelines, I am copying over my remarks to this talk page, following. In particular, please read the WP:OWN section, as you have reverted valid edits besides the signature, to personal and nonneutral point-of-view content. Thank you for your cooperation.

Personal contact information can be appropriate for an article's talk page, but usually not the article itself. Here, your personal e-mail address has nothing to do with the article's encyclopedic content, though it may have something to do with a discussion about that content, as should happen in the talk page. For further reading, see WP:OWN and WP:SIG concerning editor ownership of articles and placement of signatures. I suggest in the future before you continue signing information such as your e-mail address in an article, you consider waiting for an explanation as to why it was removed, since I see from the article's history that your e-mail address has now been reverted by three different individuals following your continued placement of the information in the article. Quick reversions by multiple editors is usually an indication of a a guidelines failure, or at least a need to query further before continuing the same action. I am not personally disturbed by any e-mail address, but I do revert information I encounter in article content that conflicts with consensus Wikipedia guidelines and operations.

Michael Devore 02:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

(posted here and User talk:82.248.106.162) Hello. We do have a manual of style that tells us how articles should be set up. Editing Satamkar so that it violates the manual of style is unhelpful and has been reverted. Please read through WP:MOS, WP:OWN, and WP:SIG. If you have any questions, you can contact me on my talk page, check Wikipedia:Questions, or leave {{helpme}} and you question on this page, and someone will be around to help shortly. Thanks. WODUP 04:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] November 2007

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Satamkar. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Gscshoyru 02:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Really, continuing to revert constructive edits is against consensus (a look at the history shows this) and is disruptive. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing in accordance with our blocking policy. Again, if you have any questions, you can contact me on my talk page, check Wikipedia:Questions, or leave {{helpme}} and you question on this page, and someone will be around to help shortly. WODUP 04:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SATAMKAR

Please, do send me an e.mail at the following address MXSLA@yahoo.co.uk and explain to me why are you spoiling the article about the SATAMKAR family. Do you have a better knowledge about this subject (Bene Israel) that I have after 17 years of researches ? Does it bother you to have the name Satamkar written in Marathi. Which rights do you have on the photographs, some of them are my PRIVATE PROPERTY and others have been given to me ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mxsla (talk • contribs) 03:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

First of all, if you're saying you're adding content based on your own knowledge, that's original research which wikipedia does not allow -- see the link. Second of all, your content is POV'd, and wikipedia strives for a neutral point of view on content. Third of all, from what you said, it sounds like you may possibly have a WP:COI, and should not be editing the article in the first place. That's why your edits have been reverted. Please read up on appropriate policy, and WP:CITE the content you add with reliable and verifiable sources. Thanks! Gscshoyru 12:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)