User talk:Nikpapag

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Nikpapag, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

— DLJessup (talk) 13:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] A somewhat weird welcome

Hi there:

I see that you've been editing Wikipedia for about three days now. It appears that you've run afoul of the local customs. Let me explain the immediate issue with Early Republican Party (United States).

The first problem is that your article was created as a cut-and-paste of an existing article. This is frowned upon, to say the least, for the reasons given in the wikilink.

Now, luckily, the cut-and-paste was caught almost immediately, before any new content was added to the article. As such, there's no need to mark the page with a merge, and it can be simply deleted, which is what Septentrionalis is trying to do.

Now, because deletion is such a powerful function, the Powers that Be have created a policy surrounding deletions. First, they disallow ordinary editors from performing deletions, saving that ability for special editors called administrators who are supposed to (a) understand these policies and (b) are trusted to carry them out. Then they require that editors go through a special procedure to have a page deleted, to ensure that everybody affected has a chance to discuss the proposed deletion and make sure that the page truly ought to be deleted. This procedure requires that a notice of the proposed deletion be posted on the article page, so that people are aware of the discussion. You are allowed to go to the discussion page and put your two cents in, but you are not allowed to simply delete the notice.

I'll be watching your talk page for a few days. Please respond here, if you wish to respond.

— DLJessup (talk) 13:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of political parties in the United States

Hello. Before making potentially controversial edits, such as those you made to List of political parties in the United States, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Also, make sure to use an informative edit summary for such edits. Otherwise, people might consider your edits to be vandalism. Thank you. -David Schaich Talk/Cont 17:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR on Republican Party (United States)

Hi! Even though I think I mostly agree with you politically, your edits to Republican Party (United States) don't seem to be adding anything useful, and you're breaking Wikipedia style conventions by removing the subheadings I put in. Also, your continual rapid reverts [1], [2], [3] look an awful lot like a violation of the Three-Revert Rule. Please discuss on the talk page before making further reverts to the page. Argyriou 17:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block

[edit] Regarding reversions[4] made on October 5, 2006 to Republican Party (United States)

 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.
The duration of the block is 24 hours. William M. Connolley 19:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Re your mail. The best way to avoid being blocked is to remember the defn of rv (which does not mean a full rv) and WP:1RR. Use the talk page instead of reverting William M. Connolley 12:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting your edits to Lyme Disease

Welcome to the Lyme Disease article. You recently made several edits [5] [6] [7] [8] without including any edit summaries. The Wikipedia guideline is that editors should usually write an edit summary on every edit to explain briefly why the edit is being made. It also helps other editors to understand the edit.

In your second edit you added unsupported assertions regarding minimum attachment durations that another editor deleted in August 2007. Unsupported assertions may be removed from Wikipedia. If you have a reliable source that supports the assertions, please cite it. See WP:RS for guidance on what counts as a reliable source. The reference citation you added is broken because it uses an incorrect format, and I couldn't fix it because it is not clear which reference you were trying to cite. Please see Help:Footnotes and Wikipedia:Citation templates for information on how to cite references in Wikipedia articles.

I am reverting your third edit because there is no evidence that A. americanum is another possible vector. Even the internal link to Amblyomma americanum which you added says, "numerous vector competancy [sic] tests have demonstrated that this tick is extremely unlikely to be capable of transmitting Lyme disease."

I am also reverting your fourth edit because it appears to contain original research regarding the itchiness of a bite.

I am restoring the original order of paragraphs under Transmission. It is logical to start with an explanation of what are the transmission vectors. Also, splitting the sentence that began "In North America" into two sentences in separate paragraphs makes an ambiguous second sentence because it is not clear which "west coast" in which continent is being referenced. The naming convention in this article has also been to use the bacterial species name before the common name(s). It is clearer and less ambiguous that way round.

Lyme Disease is a complicated and controversial subject. The article has benefited from a lot of careful work by many different editors over several years; it achieved Wikipedia Good Article status in Feb 2007. You are welcome to discuss your ideas for improving the article on its talk page. If you want to experiment with edits, please use the sandbox instead. - Neparis 17:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)