Jump to content

User talk:GB fan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 3 discussion(s) to User talk:GB fan/Archive 10) (bot
Line 43: Line 43:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. You can post a request for help at an [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|appropriate noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing.'''<!-- Template:uw-ew --> [[Special:Contributions/62.253.196.108|62.253.196.108]] ([[User talk:62.253.196.108|talk]]) 10:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. You can post a request for help at an [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|appropriate noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing.'''<!-- Template:uw-ew --> [[Special:Contributions/62.253.196.108|62.253.196.108]] ([[User talk:62.253.196.108|talk]]) 10:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
:I don't know how a single edit to an article is abuse or malicious/edit warring. [[:en:User talk:GB fan|~&nbsp;GB&nbsp;fan]] 11:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
:I don't know how a single edit to an article is abuse or malicious/edit warring. [[:en:User talk:GB fan|~&nbsp;GB&nbsp;fan]] 11:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

== https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Echemendia#/media/File:Ralphandjgljpg.jpg and Ralph Echemendia ==

This picture was taken on my phone. I have provided it to my publicist and it has been in used in several press articles. I own it.

Iy was recently brought to my attention that my Wiki page said it was paid for or something to than nature. and that the picture had been removed. While I rarely check this I decided it was time to make sure this page is valid. Other than these two issues it seems to be so.

Thank you for your time and attention. Keep up the great work.

Revision as of 02:17, 17 January 2018

This user is the owner of one other Wikipedia account in a manner permitted by policy and it is registered with the arbitration committee.
Please note: If your message is related to a disputed edit, the best thing to do is open a discussion on the talkpage of the article instead of leaving a message here. This way we may involve as many editors as possible instead of confining the discussion here. Wikipedia is a community effort. Let's use this community component. Thank you.


Are you a human?

Are you a human? I ask because of the reference to a deceased person. Susan Collins is very much alive. I tried to add the youtube clip of her pledging to be a two term US Senator but was somehow thwarted. When is common knowledge enough I wonder. Liard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liard (talkcontribs) 02:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Liard, yes I am a human. With your comment about a deceased person, I think you must be talking about the message I left on your talk page. The parenthetical statement, "(or recently deceased)", is there to explain the policy not to imply that Susan Collins is dead. Now, what you are adding needs a very good source, not someone's blog or a youtube video of her saying she would serve only two terms.
You stated that she lied in 1996 when she said that. A lie is when someone deliberately sates something that at the time they know is false and the intent is to deceive. Not following through on a promise does not make the promise a lie unless there was never any intention to follow through on the promise. The only way we can put that she lied in 1996 is for her to make a statement that she never intended to follow through on the promise she made. At this point all we have is that she broke the promise that she made. ~ GB fan 11:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Godfrey Pilkington deletions.

Dear GB,

I am new to editing. I am trying to correct my father's page which had incorrect information on it. I put in references to the Times and to the Guardian. Can you explain the copyright infringement? Should I paraphrase and then reference the articles?

Please bare with me - I am new and finding my way - and also am a little upset that wikipedia indicated that my father had been injured in a car crash in the Hyde Park Underpass which indirectly led to his death (reading between the lines).  I also need to bring up to the wikipedia a question about referencing firsthand reports - in this case the children of the deceased.  I understand the issues of corroboration - but how is History put into the record books if it can only appear on the pages of The New York Times etc...?

Yours Pilk64 - also I have no idea how to talk on my own talk page. I couldn't see a place to put in a "talk" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilk64 (talkcontribs) 21:03, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Not about you, you're only mentioned in the goings on. Kleuske (talk) 14:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse and malicious editing

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rock Profile. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 62.253.196.108 (talk) 10:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how a single edit to an article is abuse or malicious/edit warring. ~ GB fan 11:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This picture was taken on my phone. I have provided it to my publicist and it has been in used in several press articles. I own it.

Iy was recently brought to my attention that my Wiki page said it was paid for or something to than nature. and that the picture had been removed. While I rarely check this I decided it was time to make sure this page is valid. Other than these two issues it seems to be so.

Thank you for your time and attention. Keep up the great work.