User talk:Lightpositive

This user has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.
(see: block log · contributions · current autoblocks)

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello, i cannot find where i can contribute i can of course click the random article button but that gives(for the most part) unknown(for me that is) articles which i have no experience of , can i get a list or information about how i could help wikipedia ?

One way to get started would be to look at the Wikipedia:Community portal, and scroll down one page to the big section titled "Help out". I'll leave the "helpme" active so that other helpers can add other suggestions. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With your multi-language skills , might check out Wikipedia:Translation. I don't have those skills, but I understand they are often looking for help.

Given how new you are, I would urge you to contact one of the editors on this list to find how how one should proceed.--SPhilbrick T 16:07, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The backlog has many projects on it. onyx³²¹ 09:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the moment I changed the helpme-template. Feel free to change it back. Another idea to get to articles in your interests, use WP:Categories. mabdul 10:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well maybe someone did not understand what i meant, i just want to clarify that i do have a lot of experience in a lot of subjects that am interested in but meybe not so much about some french village or a rare album of some sort of musicians in the 40's that is not famous Lightpositive ^talk 13:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although i didnt say the articles about french village and 40' decade musicians are not important or good, they are very important and very good Lightpositive ^talk 15:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True Russian National Unity - The Russian Revolutionary Army - Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted because it is about a political party and it exists --Lightpositive ^{talk here} 10:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't make it notable. We never said that it doesn't exit, only that you didn't "credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject". עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

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

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
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.

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

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
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. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The warning above is not necessary. You're well aware of WP:3RR at this point. I have blocked this account for 24 hours for edit warring on multiple articles. Kuru (talk) 16:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lightpositive (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i do not deserve a block, User:El0i have made more reverts than i have why isnt he blocked too, he obviously knows the 3RR too he is a much older user than me (i created my account in 2011 and he created his account in 2006), and it was him who reverted my edits i just changed it back so he olny got a warning and i got blocked doesnt make any sense so i really dont deserve a block just as he did not get one

Decline reason:

Edit-warring on multiple articles is the major distinction. You should read the guide to appealing blocks, and understand that WP:NOTTHEM is not a valid reason for unblocking, and these are bad examples (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Can you address the claim that the 2011 census results have been released and if they have give us a link to the results? Christopher Connor (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong i maybe thought it was somehow mentioned in the official website but then i realised that that User:El0i had a rational and reasonable point about the subject and that the census results was actually not Released Lightpositive ^talk 16:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightpositive: NOTE that within the last 3 days, I've warned you twice and reported you once to WP:AN/EW, then you went on to revert your own edits on Al-Qaeda and Ayman al-Zawahiri, citing similar error/lapse in your judgement. Do we see a similar trend happening here now? So unless you have a very good explanation, consider yourself smacked in the middle of the radar scope of more than one Administrator/Editor from this moment onwards. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 17:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011 Egyptian revolution (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Ayman al-Zawahiri (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)