User talk:Silvermasked

Welcome!

Hello, Silvermasked, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! satusuro 00:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

June 2014
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Wellington Square, Perth. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Jevansen (talk) 07:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC) ITS A FACT!

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Wellington Square, Perth, you may be blocked from editing. Jevansen (talk) 08:28, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Wellington Square, Perth. Jevansen (talk) 22:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing, because of disruptive editing. You have repeatedly added commentary, expressing a point of view, to an article, despite being told several times that doing so is unacceptable. It is clear that this account has been used only to promote a point of view, and to publicise a campaign, which is contrary to Wikipedia policy that Wikipedia is not to be used for advertising or promotion. Also, you have been edit warring, which is to say that you have repeated the same changes over and over again, in the face of reverts of those changes by other editors. When one or more other editors disagree with your editing, the proper thing to do is to discuss the reasons for your edits, with a view to trying to reach agreement. Wikipedia works by collaboration, not by each individual editor repeatedly making the changes they prefer, so that the most stubborn and persistent editor eventually gets their way. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:09, 11 June 2014 (UTC)