Hello, Avataron, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! – XLinkBot (talk) 00:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Wolmyeongdong has been reverted. Your edit here to Wolmyeongdong was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://godworldwmd.blogspot.com/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 00:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Avataron, you are invited to the Teahouse!
Hi Avataron! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk).
File permission problem with File:White Statue of Holy Son in Wolmyeong dong.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:White Statue of Holy Son in Wolmyeong dong.jpg, which you've attributed to wolmyeongdong.wordpress.com. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa🍁 (talk) 14:10, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Diannaa, i just learnt about this recently so I have uploaded a new Jesus picture which I took personally. I will ensure future pictures from the websites are released with the permissions written on the site itself.
Avataron (talk) 19:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
Hi Avataron! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hi Avataron! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hi Avataron. I work on maintaining NPOV content in Wikipedia, including dealing with advocacy and conflict of interest issues. Your edits to date are focused on Christian Gospel Mission and its founder Jung Myung Seok. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.
Hello, Avataron. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:
avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.
Comments and requests
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).
Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by our WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with CGM or Jung Myung Seok? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Please reply here, I will see it. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have affiliations to the group but I have been doing extensive research about them because I have read reports, news articles and their official webpages about them that provide alternative points of views to the existing article.
Thanks for replying! Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon ":" in front of your comment, and the WP software converts that into an indent; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons "::" which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages. That is how we know who said what. I know this is insanely archaic and unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second.. Jytdog (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for replying. This thread is not about the content, but rather about you and your behavior here in WP. So you are saying that you have no relationship at all with CGM or Jung Myung Seok, including through any intermediaries (eg. a PR or other firm), or as a member of CGM? Please confirm. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 19:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Jytdog, I am not affiliated through any intermediaries but I am third party researcher on this topic based on interest. May I ask why this is of concern? Also, since you asked, may I ask of your affiliation to CGM, or if you are in association with anyone or organization that opposes CGM? Avataron (talk) 21:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No I have no COI with regard to CGM or its founder - no relationships of any kind.
With regard to you, I asked, and you answered. Please be aware that your account is what we call a WP:SPA, and your edits display what we call WP:ADVOCACY. Please read the documents at both of those links, and please read the WP:NPOV policy carefully. If you continue to edit with too much boldness and in a non-neutral manner, the community will end up taking action. Please don't take that as a "threat" - I am just letting you know how things work here in WP. Good luck, and see you at article talk pages. Jytdog (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again you were very aggressive in making the sweeping changes you did, and even now you are arguing (for instance here) to keep them. This is the kind of behavior that SPA and ADVOCACY accounts engage in, that lead to the community taking action. I am trying to give you fair warning. I will stop trying to do that now so I don't beat a dead horse. Jytdog (talk) 21:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Jytdog (talk) for explaining, and please accept my apology if I came across too aggressive as I had no intentions of doing so. My concern was in fact the same as yours, that there is NPOV among the editors, without considering what users like Sawol, Jenks and other adminstrators like Anthony who made the migration moves. Let's move on and I look forward to a constructive and fair progress on the articles. See you on the article talk page. Cheers Avataron (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Above you state that I do not have affiliations to the group, and that I am not affiliated through any intermediaries but I am third party researcher on this topic based on interest. I have spot checked your uploads on Commons, and have a few questions:
SamSailor, in response to your questions: I have already declared that I am a third party researcher on this topic based on my interest. See My user page. As a third party researcher, I do work in searching for various sources (not just one sided), including news, pictures, etc. As such, I have also asked CGM for any pictures or materials that I may use to in my research on this topic, and CGM had provided some materials with the rights to display them. (Answers to question 1 and 2). With regard to question 3, it is displayed clearer in the website's article if you actually read it to the end conscientiously that they have made available these images under those rights. While the website has a clear agenda that is biased, the sources it cites are published and unbiased sources from the news see archived article which they have translated, and I have checked the translation as well. So, take it that I am citing the content from the original news article, and deem it as a valid source. As for 4 and 5, I am sorry for the mistake in citing wrongly the copyright. How should I go about citing the copyright correctly?
Discretionary sanctions for the Providence articles
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Bishonen | talk17:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC).[reply]
You already added your new history section once today, here, and you just added it back here. Please wait for things to get sorted before restoring your changes.
Your recent editing history at Christian Gospel Mission shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 00:40, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jytdog, I had no intentions of making an edit war and I had already written on the talk page that I was going to post small bite size changes, since the entire page was reverted. How should I proceed? Post everything that needs to be edited on the talk page first, get a consensus, then post on the main page? Seek your constructive inputs, pls. Avataron (talk) 00:50, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Misrepresentations and personal attacks
I removed this comment as it is was a) blatantly false and b) a personal attack.
It is false because we discussed the deletion discussion for that article at the Talk page of the Providence article (at Talk:Providence_(religious_movement)#Page_moves.2C_splits, where I even provided a link to the deletion discussion) - and you saw and participated in that discussion. There was no canvassing.
It is a personal attack because a) it is was false, and b) you did it in obvious retaliation for Sam labelling your !vote as a SPA and page creator, in this diff
You continue to act in a way typical of advocates, and the remarks I redacted also show that it is very likely that you have edited under another account here, which you have not disclosed. On both counts, you continue to head for a topic ban.
Hi Jytdog (talk, I am cool, thanks. Please stay cool too. I tried to do my best research of what canvassing means based on Canvassing and WP:Canvassing, canvassing is the "systematic initiation of direct contact with individuals" commonly used during political campaigns" and "The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions". Harizoboh9 systematically initiated contacted with Sam Sailor, Shii, and Joy to bring them into the issue. Base on history, they have shown that they are against any forms of edits on the article that provide alternative viewpoints. Therefore, even though they were involved in the Talk page of the Providence article (at Talk:Providence_(religious_movement)#Page_moves.2C_splits, it seems evident to me that there was some form of "rallying" towards the cause typical of advocates against. Moreover, if you read Sam Sailor's comment on his talk page of "Jung Myung-seok was arrested in May 2007, and sentenced to 10 years in 2009. I don't think it's a coincidence that we, after a period of relative calm surrounding Providence (religious movement), see a big push now prior to what must be his expected release from jail. Buckle up! — Sam Sailor 10:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)", it sounds like he is making a concerted attempt to "defend" the article from any forms of revision. If you think that I made an unfair claim on canvassing, please explain in detail why I am wrong, because you are more familiar with wiki rules based on your experience. I will take the explanation, and I hope that you don't treat it as a personal attack from me but my best attempt to apply Wikipedia rules, as you abundantly have, and I respect. If your reasons are insufficient, then I think it is fair for the neutral admin assessing the AfD page to consider it with his judgment whether I am making a baseless personal attack, or an actual case for canvassing.
On the other hand, your comment that I have "edited under another account here, which you have not disclosed", sounds like a personal attack on me without any proper evidence, just because another user decided to voice their support for my article. It is such a fine line between what is a personal attack and what is an application of wikipedia rules, especially for relatively newer editors like me who are trying their best to apply the rules. For discussion please. Thank you. Avataron (talk) 01:44, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My saying that it appears that you have edited under another account is a description of behavior, not a personal attack. You will heed the warnings I am giving you, or not. Jytdog (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jytdog (talk), appreciate if you could provide a more detailed explanation on the questions in my previous thread on what appears to be canvassing. (I hope by using your phraseology, this sounds like a description of behavior instead of a personal attack now) Avataron (talk) 02:48, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Copying within
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Providence (religious movement) into Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. SamSailor01:22, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your addition to Wikipedia appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
The "Media allegations" article has extensive copying from a posting at jmsprovidence.com all throughout it. This is going to be hard to fix. I will ping an admin experienced at dealing with COPYVIO issues for advice, at the article talk page. Jytdog (talk) 01:50, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jytdog (talk, firstly, the copyvios tool you use will obviously yield 0% similarity to the various korean news sites, because they are in korean and my article is in english. Secondly, I definitely referenced jmsprovidence.com because they provide the bulk of the translation, but I have checked the translation personally, cited the sources extensively and made efforts to write it in my own words. In scholarship terms, this is not plagiarism unless there is extensive near similar phrasing, and without citation. Please explain to me how does copyright apply when we are citing from news sources, academic articles, books, etc? In my knowledge, it is plagiarism laws that apply, not copyright laws. Avataron (talk) 02:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you can contact the website editors by posting this question on the article page? I am not the right person to ask for this. Avataron (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://jmsprovidence.com/2016/09/19/jung-myeong-seok-cross/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa🍁 (talk) 03:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked
Avataron, you complained on my page about my speedy deletion of Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok as a copyright violation, and just three minutes later recreated the article under a slightly different name, Media Allegations, Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok. I don't see how you can possibly have thought that was a proper thing to do, and I don't know what to do about your persistent disruption of this topic, or this latest version of the article, other than to block you to slow you down. I've tried to investigate your complaint on my page, but it's very difficult to take stock of the changes you made to try to address the copyvio, since you made them in 13 small edits, and the "View deleted pages" functionality doesn't allow me to add them up. There's relevant discussion on the deleted Talk:Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok (I know you can't see it, but admins can). I've pinged User:Diannaa to see if she can help. Bishonen | talk14:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Hi Bishonen, I had already fixed the article of the copyright issues, and you could have checked against the new results of the COPYVIOS which shows that the problem is fixed, even though i had made the changes with 13 rounds of edits (in order for me to track the progress on the COPYVIO). My question was why you speedily deleted the page even though I had made the changes, I hope you do not interpret that as complaining. Based on my discussion with User:Diannaa, she had advised me to fix the page and once it is fixed to be able to repost it. Because the page had already been fixed, and because you deleted it, I posted the page again because it doesn't violate copy right issues based on the COPYVIO results, which had been 94% (and in the red) previously. Media Allegations, Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok. User:Diannaa, please assist to help verify my changes against COPYVIO and see whether the article deserve being deleted back then, and whether I deserve to be temporarily blocked. Thank you. Avataron (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And do you have any explanation for changing the name of the page? I too am looking forward to input from Diannaa, because I don't read her advice as allowing for recreating the article under a different name and without waiting for an admin (for example the admin you had just asked about it, i.e. me) to see if the copyvios were in fact fixed. It was pure accident that I noticed the re-created and re-named page. You have acted in a very headlong way, and as far as I'm concerned, you're going to stay blocked until Diannaa takes a look. At least until then. Bishonen | talk15:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Hi Bishonen, I have no issues with putting it under the same name again. The reason why I started a new page was because I didn't want to seem like I am making disruptive editing by reverting the already deleted page, therefore I started a new page. We need that page to exist so that the COPYVIO tool works. Are you familiar with that tool? Avataron (talk) 15:09, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Diannaa, thank you so much for your response, and I understand your important role in solving other aspects of wikipedia issues like that IP last night. I had later attributed on the talk page (of the deleted article) the copying from Providence (religious movement), and I apologize for the lack of knowledge on my part on that, but had subsequently fixed it. Enjoy your day at work, and hope to continue to discussion when you are back! 15:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC) Avataron (talk) 15:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Diannaa, I've posted an update at the AfD. Feel free to unblock if you think that's what should be done. I'm reluctant to do so for my part; I feel the people trying to keep up with Avataron deserve a little time to clean up the latest mess before there's more. Avataron, if Diannaa doesn't want to unblock you either, you're entitled to appeal for a block review by a previously uninvolved admin. There are instructions for that in the yellow box below. Bishonen | talk15:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing, see my note above and warnings on this page. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk14:33, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion. May I clarify that the page I created was deemed to be a libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced?
If this is so, then wouldn't Providence (religious movement) page fall under the section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion too, because I had referenced it significantly, but also sourced for numerous other published sources (books and news) that provide the other perspective? In fact, my written article sought to provide various perspectives of the case that ARE sourced, whereas the current Providence (religious movement) article only provides the negative perspective, and even though based on the page title it is supposed to be talking about the organization Christian Gospel Mission, it actually focuses most of the article on libel material that purely paints Jung Myung Seok in an entirely negative tone. Avataron (talk) 18:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response StAnselm (talk), will you consider having the article's content under a different title? I would appreciate if you could suggest something more neutral, because I do not have your level of experience around wikipedia yet. Thank you! Avataron (talk) 22:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The broader issue is that you did two SPLITs from the Providence article - one, a bio of the founder, and a second, on the founder's convictions and press coverage. You had no prior consensus to make those splits. The split of convictions and press coverage is especially contentious - it was essentially a POV Fork (and as St Anselm frames it, an attack article) and would not have withstood the AfD, in my view. Please do not try to re-do the splits without getting consensus first. Jytdog (talk) 01:37, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the explanation Jytdog (talk). I'll be glad to pace out the discussions and work on that page with your team that manages it. Don't worry, I've learnt not to redo the splits. I blame my lack of experience :) Avataron (talk) 03:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Avataron. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:
_soccer_event_in_2016.jpg){kind=link}
_soccer_event_in_2016.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Your addition to Wikipedia appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
