User talk:Magendad

Welcome!

 * }

February 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Kiruv Organisation has been reverted. Your edit here to Kiruv Organisation was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbZ57reYIXU, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex0bW-2SfrM) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 23:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Kiruv Organisation
Hi,

I notice your account seems to be a relative new joiner (Feb 2014) to Wikipedia editing, and is quickly involved in an editorial dispute about the Kiruv Organisation.

I ask you to read very carefully, our page on edit warring at Edit warring and take note. It's not a complicated page. It basically says, however strongly you feel, however right you might be, or others might be, Wikipedia disagreements are resolved by dialog and focussing on evidence from reliable sources, not hearsay, and not ignoring each other totally.

We do have strong rules on editor conduct; if you feel other editors break those, please feel free to ask at our administrators board, if it becomes impossible or someone simply refuses to act rerasonably. Right now, I haven't looked much at this argument, beyond noticing it has attracted a few people who don't know how Wikipedia disputes work, and may not know that people can be blocked for "fighting" or just undoing each others attempts constantly, when they should be talking about problems in an article to find a "best way to represent what is documented".

I have posted a copy of this to several other less experienced editors, or apparent newcomers, in the same dispute, so this isn't about "you" so much as just making sure you all know what the rules are and how to ask for help!

Bottom line - engage in actual "talk page" dialog if there is a disagreement on an article's handling of some matter (via the "discuss" or "talk" tab at the top of that article)..... on Wikipedia, the people who behave well, tend to endure better than the ones who disrupt. It's designed that way. If that's not working, ask for administrator help.

FT2 (Talk 13:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)