User talk:John McW

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! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - Shauri 03:18, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

3RR
Please read WP:3RR and not violate it any further or it may lead to editting blocks. Thank you.  Sasquatch  t|c 04:32, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It applies to everyone (even me). But you may have noticed I have reverted the edit for now (because I'm rather confused an being bold). Please discuss further changes at Talk:Israel and I will weigh all opinions on this matter and hopefully we can all reach a consensus.  Sasquatch  t|c 04:57, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 3RR is limited to a 24 hour time scope. Frankly, I'm not sure about the issue (hence I would be neutral) so I really don't know. The issue of whether the Gaza Strip/West Bank is part of Israel is fairly complicated and should be discussed at Talk:Israel before further changes are made.  Sasquatch  t|c 05:10, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

signatures
Hi, you can sign your name with time stamp using ~. It makes it easier for other users to see who wrote what and when, on talk pages. Thanks. &infin; Who ? &iquest; ? 05:24, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you
John, thank you for your support at Talk:Daniel Pipes. It's much appreciated. SlimVirgin (talk) 06:45, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Marsden
I'm not sure what should be done yet. I keep hoping he'll stop insulting people and aggressively revert-warring, and start working together with them on Talk: pages. That said, he has pretty much stated that his only purpose for staying on Wikipedia these days is to revert me, which is inappropriate behaviour for an editor. Jayjg (talk) 20:44, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

POV
this is regarding Israel please do not insert blatant POV statements into articles, it is very unhelpful and they will be reverted. Jtkiefer T - 02:15, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * First of all it's POV not PVO and second of all I suggest you read WP:NPOV for the guidelines on creating an article that follows a neutral point of view and does not lead to one side or another. Jtkiefer  T - 02:28, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Why have you blocked me from editing? John McW 02:54, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

blocked
I have blocked you for 24 hours for vandalism, disruption, and blatantly ignoring wikipedia's rule on Neutral point of view. Jtkiefer T - 02:53, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

how can you block me for something I didn't even know about until after I edited? And what did I vandalise or disrupt? John McW 02:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I should clarify, I blocked you for this and which was entirely unrelated to NPOV. You pretty much blanked a huge chunk of the articles talk page while at the same time adding your statement, you also made comment here which I decided not to warn you about since I assumed it was a product of frustration and wasn't a serious comment though that alone is against wikipedia's No personal attacks rule.  I suggest you take this time to read up on the relevant pages on the wikipedia rules and after you're block expires I encourge you to come back and add to wikipedia.  Jtkiefer  T - 03:02, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * At the request of User:Slimvirgin I have shortened the block to 15 minutes since you didn't know what you were doing and you did not have hostile intentions, during this time I strongly urge you to read the pages that I have linked to as well as the other guideline pages on wikipedia. Jtkiefer  T - 03:08, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you.I didn't realize I had messed up that page, I'm not used to editing on this site. i still don't know exactly what happened. Anyway, if there are rules here against "personal attacks" and "NPOV" and "disruption", as you say, why is that Marsden guy still editing? Oh, and I clicked on your "No personal attacks" link, but it took me to the "No NPOV" page. John McW 03:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi John, you're welcome, though I'd thank Jtkiefer if I were you, as he was under no obligation to shorten your block and he did so quite substantially. I'll also fix your comment on the page. Here's some info about our policies that might help you in future. One of the most important policies is Neutral point of view (NPOV), which says we have to present all majority and significant-minority views, and we should be careful to write in a dry, disinterested tone. Your comment about Israel "liberating" Palestinian land, for example, violated this policy. Also important is No original research (NOR), which says we publish views that have already been published by reputable sources i.e. we can't insert our own opinions. Your liberated comment was your own opinion and so it violated NOR. And Verifiability and Reliable sources say we have to provide sources for any of our edits that might be challenged. Liberated violated those too. In fact, it probably violated every policy we have, plus a few we haven't thought of yet. ;-D Finally, No personal attacks is also worth reading. Hope this helps. Happy editing! SlimVirgin (talk) 03:32, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Your query
John, I'm sorry I took so long to get back to you, but I've been a bit overstretched recently. Which article is it you're having problems with, regarding the reverting? SlimVirgin (talk) 07:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'll take a look now. Which article is it? SlimVirgin (talk) 03:21, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I've left a question at Talk:Syria for Yuber. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:31, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

3RR
John, I have to warn you about the 3RR rule. See Three revert rule. Try to argue the case on the talk page rather than continuing to revert. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 06:21, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Yuber
Welcome to wikipedia, Yuber is our national treasure and enfant terrible. But don't let him turn you off to the project

Your best bet when dealing with him is not to sink into revert wars but to try and get an admin involved early. That usually calms him down. Unfortunatly the general administrative structure is mildly sympathetic to him, and shirk their greater responsibility to wikipedia so very little gets done.

But if you collect enough evidence he'll get taken care of. In the long run I think he will be banned from wikipedia, probably in the next six months. Most people don't bother even trying to work on articles where he is involved. Just make sure you have good cited sources, and he can't touch you. I think he does a very good job of Dawah for his pet causes which mainly have to do with Islamic Syria and "Palestine". Klonimus 15:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's fair to say that the administrative structure "shirks their greater responsibility to wikipedia"; rather, it is reluctant to permanently ban editors that it thinks can be rehabilitated. Unfortunately, it appears that Yuber's behaviour has not improved as was hoped. I will look into this further. Jayjg (talk) 16:34, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Jay as much as I would like to beleive this, the simple fact that not one administrator responded to my request on WP:AER in over five days says that the administrative structure doesn't take Yuber's behavior all that seriously. He is not going to be rehabilitaed. It's not going to happen, he behaves exactly as he did pre-arbcom. Klonimus 02:59, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Your personal attack is noted


Marsden 21:08, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Just a friendly reminder that when you feel the urge to say something like that remember WP:CIV. Jtkiefer T 21:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)