User talk:Gazprompt

Welcome!
Hello, Gazprompt, 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:
 * 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

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

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 to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 19:06, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Please see Manual of Style/Lead section, Neutral_point_of_view. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

General note: sources don't all have to be independent, using primary sources is okay for some types of info. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 10:28, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, do you speak Norwegian? (No specific reason for asking.) — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Not very communicative, are you? — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 20:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

BLP noticeboard
Please take note of WP:BLPN. Looie496 (talk) 14:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fredrik Fasting Torgersen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hocus pocus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015
Your addition to Srebrenica massacre has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.  Scr ★ pIron IV 19:42, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Your addition to United Nations Protection Force will be removed shortly, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, and no attempt has been made to edit the text in order to highlight its relevance to the article. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. '''Pincrete (talk) 10:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

See:Copying_text_from_other_sources … and …

Copying_text_from_other_sources. Pincrete (talk) 14:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Your addition to United Nations Protection Force has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.  Scr ★ pIron IV 17:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Gazprompt, answering the question on 'UNPROFOR' page, it isn't only a copyvio matter, it's also a 'relevance' matter. Detailed (4000 page) reports can afford to go into enormous detail. An article ON THAT REPORT ALONE might have to go down to 4000 words, an article on a subject connected to the report might have to go down to 400 words + see main page. Only a few paras at a time are allowed AT MOST as direct quotes/superficial paraphrasing. These numbers aren't ABSOLUTE RULES, but they are indicators. People who want to read the whole report can do so, what they want here is the central points summarised, which has often been done best by newspapers/books. … … what is left on the Srebenica page may STILL be copyvio, more importantly, the text could probably be edited heavily to make it more immediately relevant to the conclusions reached by the report as to HOW these factors affected the 'Dutchbat' unit at Srebenica.Pincrete (talk) 18:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)


 * That one of today's versions, may STILL NOT be copyvio - that you are right about. (Noted: other versions of today, are undesired on this website. At least they are bordering to copyvio. --Gazprompt (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Gazprompt, you have been formally warned 3 times in a single day, yet you still remove copyvio tags with only the most marginal rewriting. Is there really only ONE source about UNPROFOR organisation? Are these articles about the NIOD report alone? Please learn before trying to so substantially alter articles. MAY NOT BE copyvio is not good enough, we can all make a mistake once, but making it over and over again on a single day!Pincrete (talk) 23:41, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Nazi concentration camps in Norway
 * added links pointing to Botn, Brenne, Bakken and Sundby

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rashomon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nara. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Os, Hordaland, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Romani and Tater. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Suggest self-revert
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Edward Snowden. 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. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: 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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Capitalismojo (talk) 20:22, 28 August 2015 (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.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Gazpromt, i think your edits are in good faith, but you should stop editing the page during an ongoing edit war request. Thanks.prokaryotes (talk) 10:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Edward Snowden. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 12:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)