User talk:Wifione
CLICK HERE TO LEAVE A NEW MESSAGE
(This user operates an alternate account on Wikipedia; any other same named accounts outside of Wikimedia/Wikipedia are not this user's)
|
|
|
| This is Wifione's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2015 |
| X's RfA report for the week | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Updated every half an hour only; for latest status, kindly go directly to the RFA page | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
| Talk archives for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wifione ....... Leave a message 05:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | ||||||||
|
Leave your messages below this. Thanks. Wifione Message 10:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
afshin (singer) article
hello Can you help me, To defend my article ? Saeed.hakimii (talk) 14:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
- Let me go through it and then comment. Thanks. Wifione Message 10:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- Saeed, your article seems to be saved already going by the comments on its deletion discussion. Take care and best. Wifione Message 11:56, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 09:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Nikkimaria (talk) 09:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 August 2014
- Technology report: A technologist's Wikimania preview
- Traffic report: Ebola
- Featured content: Bottoms, asses, and the fairies that love them
- Wikimedia in education: Leading universities educate with Wikipedia in Mexico
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I think the Tamil editor did not learn much during their blocking period. I susspect another edit war is in the offing. Not by me, I'm staying out this time. But just thought I'd let you know. Cheers. :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 00:41, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I think the editors are somehow managing to keep their cool. Will keep a watch. Wifione Message 16:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
"Revert last undo" on "Pogrom" article
I'm a bit unclear on what exactly you're prescribing as per [1]. I understand 3RR, and I realize that I did in fact make a 4th revert in the past 24 hours. If you look at the history, you'll notice that my initial revert was to re-integrate sourced content that had been discussed and revised on the talk page since 2008. Altenmann was the first in this latest round of attempts to remove this relevant and properly-sourced content, and did so without giving any reason whatsoever. Altenmann (who, I believe, has been warned before on Arab-Israeli conflict issues) was reverted by Oncenawhile. Monochrome Monitor, who definitely has been warned on articles relating to this topic, then removed the content again, and I reinstated it (my first "undo"). User:Galassi then appeared to yet again delete the content, this time for "no consensus for inclusion" which you'll note, as per WP:DRNC, is not close to being a valid reason for removing properly-cited content. Galassi has tried to do this several times before (see Talk:Pogrom#POV_pushing) and generally refuses to discuss the issue rationally. At the time, Galassi was aided by User:Plot_spoiler, who has been topic banned from editing Arab-Israeli conflict articles in the past. I reinstated the content yet again, and Galassi reverted it yet again, for "no consensus for inclusion". Altenmann then removed it again, and I reinstated it, asking him to take the issue to the talk page. He eventually agreed, but reported me for 3RR violation before even giving me a chance to contribute to (yet another) rehashing of the same, years-old spurious objections and arguments to the Olmert content being in the article. You'll note, from my contrib history, that whenever I make any major edit, I discuss it on the corresponding talk page, even if no one prompted me to defend my edit. He reverted again, and this time an anonymous IP reinstated the content, in a more appropriate section of the article,
I know what 3RR is, and I'm aware I violated it in this instance, but I did so in order to keep, in the article, properly-sourced and relevant content upon which I and other editors worked with each other for a long period to establish consensus vis à vis an agreeable version of the content (in short, the actual quotes were snipped and embedded in the references rather than written out in the article itself). What is an editor supposed to do when multiple people remove solid content for POV reasons that have nothing to do with the content or the article? When this happens 3, 4, or 5 times in a day? I'm not allowed to attempt to stop POV-pushing and vandalism because I'm only one person and can only revert vandalism 3 times in a day?
You write that you'll block me if I don't revert my last undo. Literally, this would mean moving the content back a paragraph, as the last edit I made was just about arrangement. Or am I to understand that you want me to remove the sourced content, effecting the POV bias of the aforementioned users who want the content gone because WP:IDONTLIKEIT, returning the article to state immediately after it was first vandalized, making that vandalism a fait accompli?
Thanks for your response, Direct Action