User talk:Dynamic IP from Chicago

Welcome!
Hello, Dynamic IP from Chicago, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Bearian (talk) 21:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Thanks Bearian. Dynamic IP from Chicago (talk) 22:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring versus BRD
Re your comments on Mike V's talk page, please note I only reverted your unsourced edit which also removed content without a good reason (B) once (BR), which I was entitled to do per WP:RV. You then reverted my revert without discussion which I had requested (BRR), which constitutes edit warring. You do not need to breach the bright line rule to be edit warring, which is a disruptive editing practice. As I have explained on the article talk page, the David Dadic article you added the second time is essentially an opinion piece and therefore not a reliable source for your edit. If you disagree with me on that, you can ask other editors at the reliable sources noticeboard. At this stage, I could have simply reverted your edit again (BRRR) but then I would also be edit warring so I didn't. Given the uncompromising attitude displayed in your edit summaries I fully expected you to continue edit warring if anyone reverted you again, and the only way to protect the page from an edit warring dynamic IP is to semi-protect it. (Please note that as a registered user, you may be blocked if you do it again, so consider yourself warned.) There had also been BLP violations since the initial semi-protection expired, so I decided to ask for the page to be reprotected. I am glad that you subsequently decided to comment on the related article talk page section I started, and some 14 hours later I considered your comments very carefully and did my best to address them in the article adding more reliable sources where necessary. After discussion had improved my understanding of the dispute, I attempted a new edit that I considered to be more acceptable to both parties. That is how WP:BRD works. Helen Online  07:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * First of all I congratulate on your Wikipedia expertise. That Talk page you posted to was my IP Talk page and I had no idea it existed. I understood from your edit summary that you wanted a source and I provided one. Regarding expertise, the thought occurs to me that you are extremely contemptuous of legal experts, their views just 'opinions' in your view. What then of Wikipedia experts? Do you concede that they may differ amongst themselves too? That you yourself may simply be wrong?


 * Presently I'm working myself through the Wikipedia tutorial. I'm gratified that it's not quite as daunting as you make it appear. Dynamic IP from Chicago (talk) 21:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * No, it's clear you broke WP:ROWN in the WP:BRD cycle, and in any case your actions were a patent breach of Wikipedia's open and welcoming ethos. I shall wait for my account to be auto-confirmed and familiarize myself with a few other issues, and then I'll refer your conduct for peer review. If you want to avoid that, you may post an unreserved apology on the article Talk page in a new section, one that includes an assurance that you will be more welcoming and accommodating of other contributors's input in the future. Dynamic IP from Chicago (talk) 23:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I am comfortable with my conduct in this matter. Watch out for the boomerang. Helen  Online  06:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I am still waiting for my account to be confirmed. I take it from the above that you are suggesting I might find sanctions imposed upon me if I refer your conduct for review. Is that so? Dynamic IP from Chicago (talk) 22:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is a risk anyone takes when reporting another. Helen  Online  06:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Dynamic IP from Chicago, you are invited to the Teahouse!

 * Thanks Jtmorgan. No issues so far. I actually used to edit HTML directly back in the early days of the web, so the mark-up language is pretty straightforward to pick up. But I'm sure there's loads of questions about other stuff that will arise and it's good to know I've got a resource there. 21:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Helen Online  06:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:NPA
Please do not attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Trial of Oscar Pistorius. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Please refrain from making unsupported accusations about other editors on talk pages meant for discussions about improving articles. Helen  Online  05:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That was not a personal attack as NPA makes clear. I let you off the hook on that ownshership question.In the end I couldn't be bothered. But I'm pretty genned up on Wikipedia by now and I, or colleagues, will be editing at Trial of Oscar Pistorius when the appeal is over and all due process exhaused. You are welcome to participate in that as far as you feel able, but if you behave to us as you did to me in the past or as you did to Joseph, then you can some ruction and an eventual ANI if you don't adopt a more collegial manner. Dynamic IP from Chicago (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)