User talk:Pangurban1

May 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. 4 reverts by one editor is the definition of an edit war. Please do not keep reverting or you too will be blocked. At the edit-warring noticeboard, by the way, please format it correctly or it will be rejected. Jasper Deng (talk) 00:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Los_Angeles_Unified_School_District, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Specificially [[1]] Gerardw (talk) 01:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you're talking about. I haven't edited or deleted anyone's comments. Thanks. Pangurban1 (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "1" next to specifically is what we can a WP:DIFF, more explictly: history diff of comment reverting Gerardw (talk) 17:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete it. Or if I did, it wasn't done knowingly. Pangurban1 (talk) 17:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably hit a wrong button, then. No big deal. Gerardw (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Jasper Deng (talk) 01:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pangurban1. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Jasper Deng (talk) 01:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern. I am a library user. Is that a conflict of interest?Pangurban1 (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on how much you interact with it.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Gerardw (talk) 11:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pangurban1, I am proposing that the thread at ANI about your behavior be closed, since you have received a final warning and since then haven't insulted any editors here. But let me tell you in no uncertain terms: joking with editors' names, yelling about their writing skills, and generally insulting those who disagree with you will get you blocked. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not sure who you are, but the user Jasper Deng has been deleting my own discussions from my own talk page. Is this allowed and what can I do to stop him from doing so? Thank you Pangurban1 (talk) 19:14, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pangurban1. I'm one of Jasper's mentors and I've advised him not to do that, so hopefully that will no longer be an issue. Likewise, I know he'd appreciate it if you restored his comments that you replaced with {{RPA}}. You're under no obligation to do so, of course, but it would be a good-faith gesture I know we'd all appreciate. 28bytes (talk) 20:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it. Since you are his mentor, may I give you some advice? I know this is unsolicited advice, and you can certainly choose to ignore it, but your mentee set the tone for this dialogue when in commenting on my edit he said "These sentences sound like PR junk" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Los_Angeles_Unified_School_District). This is highly insulting, and I'm afraid it set the tone for the conversation which admittedly went sour. Furthermore, even though I explained to him that the sentences were neither vague nor gave undue weight, as he alleged, he kept coming back to this talk page and provoking my by insisting that the was right and I was not listening, though he never answered my question about why he thought they were vague or gave undue weight. Really, all he had to do was to stop posting on my talk page. In the future, he might do well to start a conversation by setting a civil tone, and to not provoke people's anger by repeatedly provoking them. There's something to be said about knowing when to walk away from a conversation. I certainly would have done so had the conversation not been placed on my own talk page. Thank you. Pangurban1 (talk) 16:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I can't really disagree with anything you just wrote. I reviewed the talk page conversation you linked to, and if I had been in your shoes, I also would have found the responses frustrating and a bit insulting. I see you trying to determine exactly what part of your additions Jasper and others find objectionable, and the responses you receive don't really address your questions at all. That said, I do agree with the general consensus in that section that the text appears to promote a specific point of view, but that's not really relevant to the legitimate concerns you've raised about Jasper's tone and seeming inability to drop the stick. I'll speak to him about this. "There's something to be said about knowing when to walk away from a conversation" is wise advice for anyone, and that's something I hope to help Jasper learn to follow in the future. 28bytes (talk) 16:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it very much. I've gone ahead and deleted all the ugliness from this talk page. As far as the article in question, I still disagree, but I will go with the general consensus and stop using up my own and everyone else's energy. Thanks again!Pangurban1 (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and I think clearing the "ugliness" was a good call. Best, 28bytes (talk) 20:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]