User talk:Andrés Djordjalian/Archives/2013/March

Hi there

Hola Andrés, I see you've been contributing to the Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute article which I think is great, that article is in dire need of some attention. Could you add a source to this claim you added? If you stay long enough editing Falkland-related articles you'll soon notice that it's quite a difficult topic and the best way to defend your edits of immediate reverts is by always using reliable sources (and even this will not be enough a lot of times, don't let that discourage you). Seeing the high quality of your edits I hope you plan on staying around for a while. Cheers! Gaba ^(talk) 15:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hola Gaba. Thanks! For your words and the suggestion too. I can imagine that it is a difficult topic to edit and I've been concerned about Wikipedia's poor depiction of it, though not too confident about the possibility to improve it... But your help is encouraging. I'll try to contribute little by little. -- Andrés Djordjalian (talk) 00:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

Your recent editing history at Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Wee Curry Monster talk 20:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Andrés, Wee Curry Monster usually does this as an attempt to scare editors off. His warnings are also most of the times rather hypocritical: in this case you have reverted two times today while he has done so three times (so far). Anyway, edit warring is never an appropriate path to take and I'd advise you to be careful when reverting other editors and always discuss matters in the talk page. That said, you'll soon learn to take Wee's threats and WP:PAs with a grain of salt. Regards. Gaba ^(talk) 21:10, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I was already aware of these rules and recommendations but thanks for the clarifications. Gaba, thanks for the insight too. I don't feel intimidated at all, on the contrary. I think that this is confirming my idea that the WP process is not suited for disputed topics such as this, particularly when there is an imbalance due to (for example) language. I wish people were more aware of the limitations of the process. Maybe it would help if it were WP policy to keep NPOV signs on top of each of these disputed articles. -- Andrés Djordjalian (talk) 23:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)