User talk:Lightpositive

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello, i cannot find where i can contribute i can of course click the random article button but that gives(for the most part) unknown(for me that is) articles which i have no experience of , can i get a list or information about how i could help wikipedia ?

One way to get started would be to look at the Wikipedia:Community portal, and scroll down one page to the big section titled "Help out". I'll leave the "helpme" active so that other helpers can add other suggestions. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With your multi-language skills , might check out Wikipedia:Translation. I don't have those skills, but I understand they are often looking for help.

Given how new you are, I would urge you to contact one of the editors on this list to find how how one should proceed.--SPhilbrick T 16:07, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The backlog has many projects on it. onyx³²¹ 09:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the moment I changed the helpme-template. Feel free to change it back. Another idea to get to articles in your interests, use WP:Categories. mabdul 10:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well maybe someone did not understand what i meant, i just want to clarify that i do have a lot of experience in a lot of subjects that am interested in but meybe not so much about some french village or a rare album of some sort of musicians in the 40's that is not famous Lightpositive ^talk 13:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although i didnt say the articles about french village and 40' decade musicians are not important or good, they are very important and very good Lightpositive ^talk 15:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True Russian National Unity - The Russian Revolutionary Army - Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted because it is about a political party and it exists --Lightpositive ^{talk here} 10:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't make it notable. We never said that it doesn't exit, only that you didn't "credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject". עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2011 Egyptian revolution. 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. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 12:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Why was i warned for edit warring ? i did NOT break the 3RR nor was i edit warring, and why does the other person who reverted my edits not warned also ?

and also i can meybe understand why i was warned , but why was i warned with a "block" you cannot block me if i dint break 3RR

Hi Lightpositive. The reason you were warned for edit warring was that you were adding information which could be seen as not neutral, or could possibly have been unsourced - calling something "revolutionary" is a subjective term, and it was removed twice at least, and you promptly added it back again. Replacing information removed by others, more than once, is seen as edit warring. If you disagree with the fact that it was removed, you're advised to take it to the talk page and discuss it there. Otherwise as Dave1185 said, don't add it back again, or you risk being blocked. The reason 3RR was mentioned is that it's most often violated during an edit war, there is no insinuation that your broke 3RR, merely that it's something to note in the situation. Fish ^Barking? 23:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you mean that your edit warring warning is not subjective ? and then especially saying my edits was subjective and unsourced while accusing me of edit warring and then blocking people with the argument "you did not break any official rule but i simply dont agree with you" and you still didnt answer my question, why did the other people didn't get a warning but i did ? doesn't their edit warring count as well ?Lightpositive ^talk 00:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lightpositive. The reason why no one else was warned is because multiple users reverted your addition, not just one person. So the only one in danger of breaking the 3RR rule was you—not the people reverting you. When you see your aditions being reverted in this way, it is a really good idea to go to the talk page and discuss the differences in opinion there. 3RR is not an entitlement, and people can be blocked for edit warring even if they have not technically broken the 3RR rule, so if someone starts reverting you on contentious articles like this one, it is best to go to the talk page right away. Please see WP:3RR for details on the edit warring rules. Regards, --Diannaa (talk) 01:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]