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]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at United Kingdom shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Your recent editing history at White British shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The warning above is not necessary. You're well aware of WP:3RR at this point. I have blocked this account for 24 hours for edit warring on multiple articles. Kuru (talk) 16:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Lightpositive (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i do not deserve a block, User:El0i have made more reverts than i have why isnt he blocked too, he obviously knows the 3RR too he is a much older user than me (i created my account in 2011 and he created his account in 2006), and it was him who reverted my edits i just changed it back so he olny got a warning and i got blocked doesnt make any sense so i really dont deserve a block just as he did not get one

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=i do not deserve a block, User:El0i have made more reverts than i have why isnt he blocked too, he obviously knows the 3RR too he is a much older user than me (i created my account in 2011 and he created his account in 2006), and it was him who reverted my edits i just changed it back so he olny got a warning and i got blocked doesnt make any sense so i really dont deserve a block just as he did not get one |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=i do not deserve a block, User:El0i have made more reverts than i have why isnt he blocked too, he obviously knows the 3RR too he is a much older user than me (i created my account in 2011 and he created his account in 2006), and it was him who reverted my edits i just changed it back so he olny got a warning and i got blocked doesnt make any sense so i really dont deserve a block just as he did not get one |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=i do not deserve a block, User:El0i have made more reverts than i have why isnt he blocked too, he obviously knows the 3RR too he is a much older user than me (i created my account in 2011 and he created his account in 2006), and it was him who reverted my edits i just changed it back so he olny got a warning and i got blocked doesnt make any sense so i really dont deserve a block just as he did not get one |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Can you address the claim that the 2011 census results have been released and if they have give us a link to the results? Christopher Connor (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sorry i was wrong i thought it was somehow mentioned it but then i realised that that User:El0i had a rational and reasonable point about the subject Lightpositive ^talk 16:48, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]