User talk:Karohatch

March 2007

Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Atlantis. See Wikipedia:Copyrights. Copyright violations are unacceptable and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Your original contributions are welcome. --Akhilleus (talk) 06:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to drop you another note, beyond what Akhilleus left up there. It looks like the material you copied in to Wikipedia from National Geographic was properly source cited and such, so you weren't hiding what you did, but it is against the Wikipedia copyright policies. That was importing most of a whole other article, which is not OK by our policy. I appreciate that it appears likely that you didn't know what you were doing was wrong - having the citation and source there was evidence that you were not out to do something sneaky. But it is important that you understand what the Wikipedia copyright policies are for future reference.

Looking at your recent edits, I can see that you've done a lot of good article improvement, and we definitely encourage and approve of that. If any of the other material you used happens to have come from outside, can you remove it and leave a note in the edit summary to that effect? Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert 07:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I was typing that, you put the National Geographic stuff back in the article... look, this is important. Wikipedia policy says that you can't do that, and if you do it one more time I will have to block you temporarily to prevent any further copyright violations. Thanks you. Georgewilliamherbert 07:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Reinserting copyrighted materials for a third time (as an IP address, but clearly you) after two warnings.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Georgewilliamherbert 07:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Internal links

To internally link, you put the name of the article surrounded by two square brackets. Do not include the rest of the URL, the article name only is required--but I don't see that links like you recently added to the Celtic nations article are useful. Are you trying to use them to reference other articles you have taken that information from? If so, we don't reference internally. Lexicon (talk) 19:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to the Milesians (Irish) article

Your edits to the article Milesians (Irish) have been reverted as inappropriate. The article is about the mythical migration, and not about the genuine historical origins of the Irish. Your edits probably belong somewhere like Early history of Ireland. --Nicknack009 01:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Wikipedian

I took the liberty of starting your user page for you, hope you don't mind! :-) Dppowell 01:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of Ireland

What have voles got to do with History of Ireland, or pygmy voles. That's surely natural history section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.42.144.152 (talk) 22:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'm also wondering what the hell this is, that you added to Modern Celts. Please explain. Lexicon (talk) 00:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Internal linking

Hi there, and welcome to Wikipedia :) I don't think we've met before.

Just re. your edits to Ireland and a few other pages. Adding links to Wikipedia articles can be done with double-braces, thus your link to Clonycavan Man should be [[Clonycavan Man]] instead of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonycavan_Man Clonycavan Man].

If you need any help or info or anything, just leave me a message on my talk page. Oh, and as an Irish Wikipedian, maybe check out WP:IWNB and WP:NIWNB - seeya :) - Alison^☺ 23:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. With regard to those same edits. Please stop linking this article in the External links section. (You are approaching 3RR with these edits). Per Alison above, links to WP articles should not (and do not need to be) linked in this manner. Per Alison, this article should be link from the body with double braces. Which it already is. Twice. Guliolopez 01:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Demographics

Karohatch, please do not needlessly remove links from pages detailing Irish people's demographic history: the links are there for a reason, so that people can read further if they are interested. If you have suggestions about reorganising this section, please say on the discussion page, rather than adding in lots of small edits. Apollo Crua 11:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note

As noted above, please use the proper linking format for internal wikilinks. Also, the link you continue to put in the Ireland article is already in the "see also" section. Internal wikilinks don't belong in external links. IrishGuy ^talk 01:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going away for awhile and won't be on wikipedia so please feel free to make any modifications to paragraphs, sentences or external wikilinks that you think are important concerning the history of Ireland. I'm new to wikipedia and put some sentences and paragraphs in which I thought were important and recently a picture got overlapped on a few letters of a sentence that I put in.--Karohatch 23:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Celts section

Karohatch, please stop continually reverting edits in this first paragraph of this page. The myth of a central European origin for "Celts" has been clearly and robustly dismissed in the most comprehensive work on the topic: Stephen Oppenheimer on the "Origins of the British", which includes the Irish. This has been agreed to on the discussion page; if you want to make substantial changes, please discuss them there first Apollo Crua 08:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding of "references" to Modern Celts, Ireland and other articles

The "references" section is for articles, books, pages, etc., which have been used in the creation of an article. It is not for the adding of just any sites that you find interesting. In addition, as Wikipedia is moving closer and closer to requiring a proper cite for everything, the whole idea of a general references section is becoming obsolete. If you want to add information to an article that you have found from a source, you should cite each addition. The preferred way is to footnote using the <ref></ref> tags. To learn how to do this, see Wikipedia:Footnotes. However, if you must, an in-line link to each reference placed directly after the included fact is also acceptable (and will in time hopefully be converted to a footnote by someone else).

In addition, people have noticed that you have yet to respond to a single message placed on your talk page, and this is getting rather irksome for us. We are taking the time to try to help you understand the process and procedure around here, and would appreciate it if you acknowledged this with a response. Thank you. Lexicon (talk) 17:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Celts

You cannot use another Wikipedia (in this instance, the Simple English Wikipedia) as a source in a Wikipdia article. Lexicon (talk) 00:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with WP:MOS and WP:EL guidelines

I just reverted or repaired a slew of your edits, where you inserted external links into the See also section of multiple articles, often when those links were already elsewhere in the article, often multiple times. I see numerous editors have been trying to communicate with you about this. Please, read their helpful suggestions above and give the community the respect of learning how Wikipedia works before continuing to attempt these sorts of edits. If you can't or won't learn to follow the guidelines here you're going to wind up with your ability to edit being restricted. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. SFC9394 23:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 2007

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. I see you're back to adding your favorite link. While it may be acceptable on *some* pages, I remind you to carefully consider whether it is really appropriate for a particular article before adding it. Last time you spammed with this link, so make certain you do not do it again. Thanks. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 08:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Goidelic languages, you will be blocked from editing. And again on June 24th. Stop adding this link to every Celtic article you find. This is your last warning. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you added a link to Ireland that you have previously been warned about as being spam. Please do not do so again. ~~ Meeples (talk)(email) 03:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Celts. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Again with that same link. Stop it. It's already on the page. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are not inappropriate links and are surely justified by the y-chromosome links to the supposedly Galician Spain people and the small minority of Galicians in Ireland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Spain) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karohatch (talk • contribs)

Thank you for finally responding. These particular genetics links are useful in *some* Celtic articles, but not all. In the articles where a link is relevant, it only needs to be linked *once*. You have repeatedly gone into multiple, barely-related articles and added the link multiple times, even after it's been removed repeatedly, by different editors, who have attempted to explain to you multiple times why you shouldn't do this. You've also repeatedly changed extant wiki links, made by putting double brackets around a word, to full URLs. Again, even after people have explained to you why this is not desirable. Other editors have asked you over and over to familiarize yourself with basic WP:MOS guidelines, to use edit summaries, and follow basic Wiki conventions and Wikiquette, but you have consistently refused to do so. You need to understand that this behaviour is not conducive to constructive collaboration. A little bit of time and effort on your part, and consideration for other contributors, would go a long way. Thanks. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Gaels, you will be blocked from editing. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing under an IP to attempt to evade final warnings didn't work. Your IP 24.57.235.246 (talk · contribs) has now been blocked for spamming. If you continue to edit using this account while your sockpuppet is blocked, this account will be blocked as well. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Gaels. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Cúchullain ^t/c 07:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning.
The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Celts, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from any site that uses the MediaWiki spam blacklist, which includes all of Wikimedia and Wikipedia. --Cúchullain ^t/c 07:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

--Cúchullain ^t/c 06:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]