User talk:Yorkuk

Welcome!

Hello, Yorkuk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Operation Trojan Horse 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! Alfietucker (talk) 09:15, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Operation Trojan Horse
I understand you have strong feelings about this subject, but Wikipedia is not the place to stand on a soapbox and tell the world of the evils of Michael Gove - at the very least, not in the manner in which you are doing so without any citations, in a non-encyclopaedic manner, and in a clearly non-neutral POV. Please desist as your continuing to edit in this way could be construed as WP:edit warring and if you persist could result in you being blocked from the site. Do please read the links on the welcome message I posted earlier, and if you then decide to contribute to Wikipedia in an appropriate manner (in line with Wikipedia policies) then you are welcome to do so. Alfietucker (talk) 09:25, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * '''fortunately all of my edits are within the terms of wikipedia can be fully referenced to mainstream media reports. so im wondering why you dont reference them.


 * But you have a very biased version of the trojan horse hoax, i am able to reference all of my claims. so are you more interested in your islamophobic version or the one that is closer to the truth? Yorkuk (talk) 09:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately you have not given any references in line with Verifiability. Furthermore, your editing to date has been disruptive. Your next step, rather than trying to impose your material, is to discuss it on the article's talk page: otherwise you are WP:Edit warring and I will have no hesitation to report this if you persist. Alfietucker (talk) 09:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

i am adding references to my edits.Yorkuk (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

question is why are you promoting an islamophobic version rather than a neutral fact based article? Yorkuk (talk) 09:48, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

so what objection do you have with this http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article4029359.eceYorkuk (talk) 09:52, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * That article is from March, we called it "alleged plot" then. Subsequent investigation in June has changed since then. &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 14:19, 16 July 2014 (UTC)