User talk:All Rows4: Difference between revisions

Welcome!

Hello, All Rows4, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard
  if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

Wikipedia is a megalopolis and like in any city, interactions are very important. I recommend that you develop your user page so that people who visit your page may know your interests and share in them. It could be a single line telling others of not only your name but what you like or a complex page with every single thing that interests you on it. This is a great way of building up work groups that facilitate the sharing of expert knowledge on articles, talks etc. Happy building!!!  CrossTempleJay  talk 15:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Being a member of

As you age on Wikipedia, one thing you will come across and probably address will the issue of bad edits or vandalism. There are several ways of spotting them:

• by reviewing articles on your watchlist regularly and looking for bad edits
• verifying
  new changes to pages and articles

If you happen to come across a bad edit you may:

• ask an
  editor you trust to review the work for his/her inputs
• you can rollback the change if you have credible information that the edit is indeed bad
• request that the necessary change be made on the article's
  talk page
  .

Whatever you do, please be very careful about the changes you make, for a rule of thumb, discuss issues you are not sure of first before making changes. CrossTempleJay  talk 15:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

G'day All Rows4,

you threw out my edit of Plan_Dalet with the apparent grounds: "this is not a blog." Perhaps not, but it (wiki) is supposed to be a reference source - or so I presume(d). I made another edit to a related article, also thrown out, on grounds: WP:V = "Material added to articles that is not attributable to a reliable, published source appropriate to the content in question may be removed," my accent on *may,* but you must be familiar with all of WP:V.

What stimulated my edits was this: "The meeting significantly advanced Herzl's and Zionism legitimacy" - an impossibility given the subsequent theft of most of Palestine by invading alien Zionists; that wiki thus contains a statement not attributable to any reliable, published source - unless such a source contains lies.

IF wiki is to be useful THEN it needs major revision, to revert to a *true* history.

BTW thnx for telling me something I already knew ("1 revision rule.") As if I would persist in the face of yours or any other's rejection.

regards, wiφ 16:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by WiPhi (talk • contribs)

I am happy to hear you were already aware of the 1 Reviosn rule. Seeing as you are a new editor with less than 10 edits, that was not obvious to me, but I'm glad you took the trouble to familiarize yourself with it. You should now do the same for a few other policies, such as

WP:NPOV policy and (c) find yourself blocked for disruptive editing. Take care. All Rows4 (talk) 22:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

The

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision

" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:45, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply

]