User talk:Campcoreec

Welcome

Hi, Campcoreec. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  17:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

ようこそ You don't need to read anything - anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people. Ask for help. Talk to us live, or edit this page, put {{helpme}} and describe what help you need. Someone will reply very quickly - usually within a few minutes. Play in your user area. For example, create User:Campcoreec/test. Edit existing articles, before you make your own. Look at some subjects that you know about, and see if you can make them a bit better. For example, Wikipedia:Cleanup#2009. When you're ready, read about Your first article. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references. Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page. There's lots of information below. Once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia! --  Chzz  ►  17:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Grade sources • Cite sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists • Best articles Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Pages needing attention • Peer review The missing manual

May 2009

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 Uluru, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please do not change the name of official and well-established locations like you did for Uluru. That is the officially-recognized name. If you have qualms or suggestions, use the talk page and discuss with other editors. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 18:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

That's your personal opinion. The Australian government decreed that it's official name, under the dual-naming policy, was "Uluru/Ayers Rock", and through consensus amongst editors, we here at Wikipedia use the term Uluru, with Ayers Rock being mentioned throughout the article. Not to mention, Uluru is officially Aboriginal property, and thus uses the Aboriginal name, so your "we speak English" argument really isn't appropriate. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 18:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Joanna Lumley appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you should have worded the statement differently because "Now loads of Gurkhas will stream into the country putting strain on resources" sounds more like a complaint than a constructive statement. If you want to add this information, you need to find a reliable source which backs up the opinion, and perhaps even quote some figures. Take a look at some of the news articles relating to the subject, e.g., from the BBC, Daily Mail, Times Online, etc, and by all means add the other side of the argument to the article. TheRetroGuy (talk) 21:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)