User talk:Honestmedia

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

March 2014

Your addition to Doctor (title) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:05, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Socialism. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Your edits to this article are breaching several Wikipedia guidelines. You are edit-warring to introduce unsourced, contentious commentary, and are using deliberately deceptive edit summaries. If you continue with this pattern of editing, you are very likely to find yourself blocked. Please stop. RolandR (talk) 18:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Socialism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. RolandR (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Hello, I'm Corkythehornetfan. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Lester Holt, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 17:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Martha Raddatz. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BURDEN

Hi there, I'm an administrator on the English Wikipedia. Re: your discussion at User talk:Corkythehornetfan and the edit war you are engaged in at Lester Holt and wherever else, per WP:BURDEN, when content you add is challenged, the burden is yours to substantiate that with references, not to keep resubmitting the same information and requiring that the other editor look it up. References belong in articles where readers can access them. If unsourced content you submit is challenged, the version of the article prior to the controversial change should remain intact until consensus exists to change it. Your repeated changes are disruptive and your suggestion that Corckythehornetfan vandalized the article, is without merit. Edit-warring, yes, vandalism, no.

I urge you to please revert your own changes and take the matter up on the articles' talk pages. Any continuation of this will be treated as disruptive. If you're not sure how to add references, see Referencing for Beginners, but the bare minimum is to paste a URL between <ref></ref> tags. However, we do have stringent guidelines on sources for biographical articles. I don't believe public records, for instance, should be used. See WP:BLPPRIMARY, which says:

"Exercise extreme caution in using primary sources. Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses."

Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]