User talk:U rob me

January 2015
Hello, I'm Barek. I noticed that you made a change to an article, PIGS (economics), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:50, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

April 2015
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Corruption, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''Wikipedia articles cannot serve as references. See WP:CIRCULAR'' Neil N  talk to me 21:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry NeilN, the Wiki article I cited includes the respective references. Therefore, I will just link them to my new article in "Corruption". Hope that is OK with you.U rob me (talk) 14:09, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

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 Corruption, you may be blocked from editing. ''Your continued attempts at adding the same material and this edit summary leads me to think you are trying to use the article as a soapbox. Please stop.'' Neil N  talk to me 21:07, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello NeilN, obviously I am not experienced enough to contribute in a way that everybody can accept my article. Sorry again, I don't want to bother you. However, perhaps you could give me a hint how to modify it. I just want to give a typical example of a national law on "Legal Corruption":

My text contains 90% citations of some official records of the Bonn Parliament from 1993-1995. There is one "Parliamentary Proposal" with its "Motivation" as well as the governmental reaction which is also cited from the official records. There is no "commentary and personal analysis" from me. Even in my introducing sentence: "Resounding efficiency in fostering corruption of private corporations against other countries was achieved in Germany after the EC southern expansion." Most parts (except of "Resounding efficiency") are translated from those Parliamentary records.

Because I believe that my contribution is important, please help me to improve it. What part shall be removed/modified? Is it my introduction or does my reference to those German Parliamentary records violate Wikipedia's rules? U rob me (talk) 22:28, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * See WP:PRIMARY - You need secondary sources to interpret what the official records mean. Your intro sounds as if the government wanted to encourage corruption. What secondary source is saying this? --Neil N  talk to me 22:38, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Your interpretation is correct. My intro refers to the "Motivation" (below) of the respective Parliamentary proposal. In those years the government decided to encourage (only) foreign corruption. They earned a lot of criticism from the parliament and from OECD for years. Until they stopped bribe tax deduction in 1999 and more consequent in 2002. Those laws even prevented that prosecutors could have access to files from tax offices where bribe money was declared officially. All that is discussed in the records. Shall I translate every single phrase there? Thanks for your time. U rob me (talk) 22:55, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Like I said above, you need to find a secondary source that has this interpretation. --Neil N  talk to me 23:13, 5 April 2015 (UTC)