User talk:Thewolfiv

Edits to Tiger and Panther articles
We appreciate your enthusiasm and willingness to contribute. However, the content you are adding to these two articles is inaccurate and written in a style that is not approporiate for an encyclopedia. You may perhaps want to spend more time doing research, discussing your proposed changes on the talk pages before posting, and familiarizing yourself with wikipedia policies such as original research and citing sources.

I think you'll find your fellow editors will be glad to engage any discussion you may initiate on the talk pages for these articles. If you continue adding inaccurate content or original research to articles, without discussion, you may find yourself continuing to be reverted. This makes your effort a waste, and creates unproductive work for those other editors. I don't doubt your good faith intention to contribute to wikipedia and I hope you learn how things are done and stick around.

Regards, DMorpheus 01:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

my content is inaccurate? im sorry but who are you to tell me its inaccurate please check your facts before deleting others peoples work, my uncle is the head of WW2 history at edinbourgh university so i assure you i know my facts, do you even know what blitzkrieg is based on? as for my writting it is of the same quality as the other information, and im lost as to why you think your knowledge is great than mine? just to top it off i also live in normandy, France and i am well aware of the history of this region and WW2 but if this page is all your work and i am adding to your work then for that i am sorry but if it is a community site which everyone contributes then please leave my work (you state that the pather had a ration of 5 to 1 like the tiger i dont know where you get your stats but for the tiger it was closer to 10 to 1 especially on the eastern front)


 * OK, my friend. I tried to offer you some help. Here's a prediction: others will revert your work also until it improves. DMorpheus 14:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

thank you for the help but its wasnt asked for, and by others you mean you? I don't doubt your good faith but please leave my work alone i dont agree with your statments but i leave them as they are.


 * Sorry but it really looks like you do not know what you are writing about, your grammar is poor and your contributions are full of POV. Please learn/research how well (or not) these vehicles performed and then come back and check what needs to be edited in these articles. You may understand this as a lower grade warning, if you continue to revert articles and insert your rubbish some other user with more knowledge than you may report you as 3RR violator. --Denniss 17:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

well thanks for the warning but ill take my chances, as for the POV ok i take your point but with respect, you critic my grammer but if i understand, you are german and you have made a grammatical error in your reproch to my work which makes me wonder why i should class your work above my own? also my "rubbish" is based on fact,these include well know facts like tiger kill ratios by the end of the war were far higher the 5 to 1 stated, and were much closer to 10

One other point i am not vandalising others peoples hard work i am mearly adding to the information available and i forget but since when has wiki become the play ground of others to deem whats fit to post and whats not if your not aware of something or a fact thats unknown to you do you delete it? i dont understand your logic if i was posting false information then ok i agree but please check what i have said once you can prove to me that the information is wrong ill remove it(and no not via wiki)i have the facts on which i based my work all i ask is you leave it alone or denounce it if you can....

Wikipedia does not have firm rules besides the five general principles elucidated here. Be bold in editing, moving, and modifying articles, because the joy of editing is that, although it should be aimed for, perfection is not required. And do not worry about messing up. All prior versions of articles are kept, so there is no way that you can accidentally damage Wikipedia or irretrievably destroy content. But remember — whatever you write here will be preserved for posterity.