User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, such as the one you made to Barcelona. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. If you edit without a username, your IP address ( is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! Marek.69 talk 13:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

January 2010[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add content (particularly if you change facts and figures), as you have to the article Sea Fighter, please cite a reliable source for the content you're adding or changing. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -MBK004 22:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for removing my addition to Sea Fighter. I have noticed in other aticles that someone has only found it necessary to include a citation query, rather than removing perfectly factual information. Sea Fighter was designed by the British company quoted. I obtained the information from a TV programme and checked it with the company website. Pity you couldn't have checked before deleting my contribution. I think that this has effectively put me off creating an account or adding any meaningful contributions.

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page M1 Abrams has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 19:46, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The amendment to the M1 Abrams page was not unconstructive. Since Chobham armour, together with its predecessor Burlington and successor Dorchester is a British invention and design, it is not only proper but courteous to use the spelling of the inventor. I can't be bothered to put it back again but it would demonstrate proper courtesy were you to do so. (talk) 15:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

3RR warning[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on M1 Abrams. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. BilCat (talk) 19:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not engaged in an edit war. I have pointed out to another correspondent that it is only courtesy to use the language of the inventor of a product. Chobham armour, together with its predecessor Burlington and its successor Dorchester are British inventions. Note that no amendment was made to the American English word armor elsewhere in the article, only in relation to the British invention. (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Changing variants of English warning[edit]

Information.svg In a recent edit to the page M1 Abrams, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to other English-speaking countries, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the appropriate variety of English used there. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, you can ask me on my talk page or you can visit the help desk. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I have answered your comments elsewhere. Please consider again that Chobham armour is British. Also the most internationally recognised version of English is what you term British English, not least because it has been in existence for longer. (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

You need to discuss this on the M1 Abrams talk page, and not continually revert the article. Your changes are not in line with the existing WP:ENGVAR policy. - BilCat (talk) 16:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)