User talk:93.19.187.248: Difference between revisions

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Monolith (Space Odyssey), please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs, forums, mailing lists, etc. are not reliable sources and may not be used to cite anything on Wikipedia. Stop adding trivia, we don't care what's in some stupid game. See WP:IPC for how to distinguish between trivia and something significant. Clue: this ain't. Yworo (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and before you say it, "other stuff exists" is not considered a valid argument here. Yworo (talk) 21:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, you'll be sweet enough, as an administrator, not to judge about the quality of a game. Your personal taste or opinion doesn't have anything to do with the content of WP articles. Second, you'll learn to be somewhat coherent before editing, since there's already data about the monolith being in a couple video games, AND that some are sourced with the same kind of non-perennial source. Thank you.

Oh, and by the way, the other stuff exists argument is about articles, not content by itself, otherwise it would negate the purpose of WP. Any old-school WP user is aware and understand the rationale behind this, I'm surprised that someone such as you could be admin nowadays. 93.19.187.248 (talk) 21:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup and I removed those too. Clearly you didn't read WP:IPC, which I quote:

When trying to decide if a pop culture reference is appropriate to an article, ask yourself the following:

1. Has the subject acknowledged the existence of the reference? 2. Have reliable sources that don't generally cover the subject pointed out the reference? 3. Did any real-world event occur because of the reference?

If you can't answer "yes" to at least one of these, you're just adding trivia. Get all three and you're possibly adding valuable content.

Yworo (talk) 21:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Monolith (Space Odyssey). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Yworo (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Monolith (Space Odyssey). Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Yworo (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you fucking serious with this? I'm not going to let you do as you please about this, administrators have responsibilities, they also follow rules and are bonded to act according to it. Keep doing this and I'm going to report you, you clearly are a biased admin abusing its powers.

Oh, and I'm adding again "my" content, supported by a reliable source, which isn't a simple "blog" as you try to fake it up, but a recognized gaming website. If you revert it again, YOU will breach the 3RR rule, since I've only added original content to an article, that you keep reverting without any viable and honest reason. You also are not here to decide what is trivia, nor giving a priority order to topics or contents that please you the most, nor to read and use the WP rules the way you want them to be. Thank you. 93.19.187.248 (talk) 22:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's your fourth revert, you will shortly be blocked from editing. Yworo (talk) 22:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And you'll be shortly reported about all this, enjoy it. You should consider a bit of self-reflection about your motives and actions on WP. 93.19.187.248 (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're the one ignoring our policies. You are also making personal attack, which is also against policy. Yworo (talk) 22:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sure. Keep your head in the sand so that you won't hear anything wrong about you, as for me I only care about the quality of WP articles, not blind admins overusing their powers. 93.19.187.248 (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:IPC, your addition degrades the quality of the article with a piece of trivia which has no significance to the subject. It's a "mention", not an in-depth literary reference which adds to the understanding of the subject of the article. Yworo (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:2001: A Space Odyssey (film), you may be blocked from editing. Yworo (talk) 22:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop implying fallacies to charge me, anyone looking at the history can see that I just made a mistake editing it, and I just changed it back. You really are a pathetic person... 93.19.187.248 (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please also stop acting like an admin. You are not one, and probably won't ever be, with such nefarious behaviour. 93.19.187.248 (talk) 22:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]