User talk:Satravfloyd

Please stop your biased editing of the article Sri Lankan presidential election, 2010. Wikipedia articles must be of a neutral point of view, and it is not the place for propaganda. You have also re-introduced a copyright violation that I had removed. You're welcome to edit Wikipedia articles in a neutral manner. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 14:03, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Sri Lankan presidential election, 2010. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.  snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 18:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Maintaining a neutral point of view
Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. Just a note for you, when you edit articles, you are expected to maintain a neutral Point of view. This means representing all sides of a given argument, not just the point which you support. For example, in the NYT article you cite, the full quote is "Independent Sri Lankan election monitors said there was no evidence of major fraud in the voting, but left open the possibility of problems in the counting.". By deleting the first part of that section, and simply quoting the latter part, you are giving your POV a preference. That is not allowed. If you have any questions, let me know, or head over to WP:HELP. -- snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 18:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, if you have any questions regarding the article content, please discuss them at the article talk page. -- snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 18:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

You keep reintroducing directly copy-pasted material from external sites, not to mention maintaining an obviously biased point of view on that article. Discuss any problems with the article talk page, and as I said before, you're welcome to edit in a neutral manner. However, I'm afraid you will be blocked if you keep going like this. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 03:28, 29 January 2010 (UTC)