User talk:Drgreative

Editing tips
Note that I've reverted the changes you made to the Artel Kayàru article. Two of the most important Wkipedia policies are 1) article content must be written from a neutral point-of-view and 2) content added must be verifiable through the use of reliable sources. If you would like to add or update any information in the Artel Kayàru article, or any other Wikipedia article, please ensure that you are aware of the policies I've linked to. I've also included a number of helpful links above to help you get started. Happy editing, --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 14:12, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Artel Kayàru, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
 * Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Artel Kayàru was changed by Drgreative (u) (t) blanking the page on 2010-05-07T04:07:09+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 04:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:Ponyo. Thank you. Please do not threaten other editors with administrative action. --N419BH (talk) 04:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Donald Duck (talk) 04:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --N419BH (talk) 04:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Artel Kayàru. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. ''You have been reverted by four different editors now. Please discuss issues on the talk page. We need reliable, third party sources, especially for information on living persons.'' --N419BH (talk) 04:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Artel Kayàru
None of these editors are claiming you have incorrect information. Wikipedia has very specific policies on Biographies of Living Persons. In particular, we do not want unsourced content as it can be potentially libelous or slanderous. If you provide verifiable, reliable sources in the article itself it will help your edits be accepted by the community. Additionally, editors are strongly discouraged from editing articles in which they may have a conflict of interest. I strongly recommend reading the above link to WP:BLP for information on Wikipedia's guidelines regarding biographies. Should you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. You can also request help by placing on this page and asking a question below it. Thanks!

By the way, if "Artel Kayàru" has changed to "Artel Great" and you have a source for that information, an Administrator can change the name of the article itself. --N419BH (talk) 05:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. I understand your frustration. I left your latest revision, but one of the other editors has once again reverted it because they do not believe IMDB meets Wikipedia's definition of "reliable source". However, I do have an idea for an alternate means of achieving the same goal:


 * Instead of deleting the picture, do you have a better photo that is not copyrighted? Your own work perhaps? If you do, look through the instructions at Uploading images. Make absolutely sure you follow the copyright instructions carefully, otherwise the image will be quickly deleted for potential violation of copyright laws.
 * For the hometown, do you have some sort of biographical article that appeared on a newspaper's website or in print? Don't use a birth certificate or anything of that nature. Wikipedia does not like to use primary sources.
 * For the movie you deleted, can you find some sort of news article to back it up?


 * I know that's a good bit of work and doesn't immediately solve the problem of an inaccurate article. For that reason, I am adding a message to the top of the article, indicating that its "Factual Accuracy" is currently disputed. I will add a note to the article's talk page explaining this. Good luck finding those sources, and if you need anything, you know how to contact me. --N419BH (talk) 16:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)