User talk:Northern winter

Welcome, and....
Welcome to Wikipedia. You will find some helpful material at this page.

I have reverted your change to Staines. The information you removed was adequately referenced, but your information was not. If you continue with such editing you risk being blocked from editing for vandalism. Moriori (talk) 23:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

And again
I have reverted your even more recent change to Staines. The previous information, except for a minor change which has been incorporated in my edit, was adequately referenced. References for the information you added do not seem to stack up, or are very difficult to access if they actually exist. Please do not remove information which was in the article, and do not replace the information you added without adequate, accessible referencing. Moriori (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Your call
. You never responded to the message above, and have since reverted the referenced information again. It seems you are not getting the message and may just continue on reverting, so I am blocking you from editing for a period. You will be able to communicate here on this page if you think you can explain your edits. Your call. Moriori (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

In defence of Northern Winter
The references they provide seem to make mathematical sense of the councils own official figures and the published responses to the consultation. Whereas the references for the opposition point to a local newspaper story that states “Attendees of the meeting were told that residents of many of the town's wards were 70-80% in favour of the change”. It seems that this could be a case of local councillors pulling the wool over the eyes of the electorate and ‘massaging’ the figures to back up their own ideas. Northern Winter seems to have a legitimate, and factual, case for declaring their ideas. The question should be whether Wikipedia is the place to publish these ideas. Equally, publishing the opposing ideas, and not these ones, does not show neutrality. I suggest we all read the note that I have put on the Staines talk page, find some middle ground, and move on. AndrewJFulker (talk) 13:22, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There are so many things wrong with what you wrote at the Staines talk page. I will comment after Northern Winter responds. Moriori (talk) 20:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have left a comment on the Staines talk page. Moriori (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Warning
I have left a response to the post you made at the Staines talk page. You will be blocked from editing if you yet again remove verifiable sourced information. It has also been demonstrated at the Staines talk that the stats you insist on re-adding to the page are terribly unbalanced, and therefore unencyclopedic. Moriori (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

And another
Your recent edit to Staines was appalling, and I have reverted it. You left the following edit summary -- "Removed an incorrect assertion that the Council Meeting was presented with 70-80% support for the plan, and a citation which does not refer to this."

The article says "Information presented at the council meeting indicated residents of many electoral wards in Staines were up to 70-80 percent in favour...."

The reference says "Attendees of the meeting were told that residents of many of the town's wards were 70-80% in favour....."

Can't be clearer than that. Despite all the warnings, you continue to disrupt Wikipedia by removing referenced material. Moriori (talk) 21:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Blocked again
You have again been blocked from editing, for this abuse of editing privileges, the removal of adequately sourced text. Please read WP:V where you will see the following -- "Verifiability on Wikipedia is a reader's ability to check cited sources that directly support the information in an article" and "Verifiability, and not truth, is one of the fundamental requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia....". If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text  below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Moriori (talk) 21:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth
Firstly, I cannot believe that this is still going on. And secondly, this looks like bullying to me. Calling someone’s posts ‘appalling’ and repeatedly pursuing them on a contentious issue seems like victimisation. This decision should be opened up to a different administrator to ensure that it is treated with impartiality. AndrewJFulker (talk) 14:11, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you, AndrewJFulker for your comment. I have no idea how this works, or when and by whom this appeal will be reviewed, but I do hope they read your comment along with it. I admit I'm a relative newcomer to Wikipedia, and am finding my way with its procedures, but the whole experience has left me rather sick and not well disposed towards the whole project. I have only pursued it because a certain user seems to want to put what I think most Staines residents would regard as a biased slant on this story, backed up by a reference that is flawed and by no means 'official'.

Talk:Pah Tum
Hello Northern Winter;

I saw your comments on the Talk Page of the Pah Tum article. You list a huge number of games resources that you were able to consult. I wonder, if you have time and inclination, to take a look at the Articles for deletion/Blue Canary page and see if you can turn up anything about this game in any of those resouces? I suspect it's also a made-up game, but some extra eyes on it might be useful. Thanks. Neil916 (Talk) 21:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)