User talk:Chbarts

Welcome
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * How to edit a page; Editing tutorial; Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article; Naming conventions; Manual of Style

Whosyourjudas (talk) 00:23, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

September 2008
This is your only warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jclemens (talk) 17:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Given that you refuse to discuss any of this, I have a hard time taking you seriously. BLP isn't your personal whapping stick. chbarts (talk) 20:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Snobol
Recently you edited the article on SNOBOL. I have made a comment about this on the Snobol talk page; I am letting you know in case you may like to read it. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Seeking concensus
On the SNOBOL page you deleted a statement you did not like, and wrote the edit summary "as per talk page, this is staying out until it is cited". This does not, on the face of it, read like an attempt to discuss the contents of the page, and try to reach concensus: it reads more like an announcement that you think you have the right to impose your opinion. I trust that this impression is wrong, and due to an unfortunate choice of words on your part. 217.158.132.35 (talk) 22:51, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

June 2010
Please do not remove blanking from pages which are tagged as possible copyright violations, and do not refer to such blanking as vandalism. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad
If the disagreements are getting to you, step away from the discussion. Don`t treat it like a battleground, and don`t insult the other editors. Wily D 06:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I get that you're venting, but it's still a bad place to vent. Even if that person doesn't come back, other people see it, and it contributes to the whole atmosphere. The less hostile the atmosphere there is (especially over images), the better. Wily D  07:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

7/7 Ripple Effect
'the descriptor is in the citation'

A critic's insult for a documentary maker, does not belong in an article's opening for one of their works. Beingsshepherd (talk) 17:07, 27 April 2014 (UTC) beingsshepherd

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

You are violating WikiProject:Magic and WP:Attribution policy
You have been continually restoring unsourced, uncited methods in magic articles.

Please refer to the 'Rapid Action' policy of WikiProject:Magic, which states:

"Any edit lacking attribution may be removed, and the final burden of evidence lies with the editor wishing to add or retain the material."

"[T]his can be applied immediately and overrides the practice of tagging information as unsourced and then waiting for a period to see whether citations are subsequently provided."

"Only when a full citation can be provided can the method be added to the article."

Also refer to WP:Attribution, which states:

"Original research refers to material that is not attributable to a reliable, published source. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, ideas, statements, and neologisms; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position. Material added to articles must be directly and explicitly supported by the cited sources.

Note the difference between unsourced material and original research:

''Unsourced material is material not yet attributed to a reliable source. It is unattributed but may be attributable. Original research is material that cannot be attributed to a reliable source. It is unattributable. The only way to demonstrate that material is not original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say."''

'''Please stop restoring original research and violating these two policies. I would be happy to discuss this ad nauseum with you if you have any questions.'''

ShimmeryPhantom (talk) 20:04, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Chinese_new_year_dates_SMIL.svg
Hello, Chbarts. You have new messages at your Commons talk page. You can [ remove this notice] at any time.

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shining Victory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sanitarium. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Doug Weller talk 16:09, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Posted to WP:BLPN
I have no idea what others will say, but we'll see. Doug Weller talk 16:17, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

February 2024
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Blink element. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and 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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ''It seems that you have been edit-warring for, apparently, thirteen years straight to repeatedly remove examples from this article; despite presenting no consensus, policy, or evidence as a basis for doing so. Please stop doing this.'' jp×g🗯️ 23:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.