User talk:El rrienseolava

February 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Tango appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 15:47, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Iguazu Falls
Hi, El rrienseolava. Please be aware that in repeatedly adding text to the article, you are edit warring, which is prohibited. According to Wikipedia policy, the burden is on the editor adding material to justify its inclusion. That means you need to stop trying to add it and instead discuss it on the article's talk page. Thanks for understanding. Rivertorch (talk) 19:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Iguazu Falls. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: 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. Rivertorch (talk) 22:32, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I've replied to your message on my talk page. Rivertorch (talk) 05:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

In response to your latest edit of Talk:Iguazu Falls, please understand that no one here is questioning the truth of what you wrote. Wikipedia simply requires verifiability, using reliable sources, and we can't just take anyone's word for it. Cheers, Rivertorch (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)