User talk:Link1914

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Link1914, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Keith Raniere. 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. Drmies (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting edits to Administrator

[moved from your user page by Drmies] Hi Link, After reviewing edits to the NXIVM page, I thought it important to note that the edits you have been deleting and adding seem to be in violation of NPOV rule. Also re-adding the supposed rules of NXIVM without any citation seems to indicate that posting those rules are in clear copyright violation, if not, then cite secondary sources (not including a blog which I could publish with a different set of rules) that brings about the text. Just to remind you as to as Wikipedia's criteria on that:

What counts as a reliable source The word "source" in Wikipedia has three meanings: the piece of work itself (a document, article, paper, or book), the creator of the work (for example, the writer), and the publisher of the work (for example, The New York Times). All three can affect reliability. Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form); unpublished materials are not considered reliable. Sources should directly support the material presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. In general, the best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments; as a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science. But they are not the only reliable sources in such areas. Material from reliable non-academic sources may also be used, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include university-level textbooks, books published by respected publishing houses, magazines, journals, and mainstream newspapers. Electronic media may also be used, subject to the same criteria.

I am trying to resolve this issue without going to an administrator, so please note that any information that you are providing without citations (or dubious ones at best), removing without cause, or adding in that violate NPOV, will be reported. I suggest if you do have an issue with some of the content, that we work together to resolve it on the discussion pages. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter U21980 (talk) 06:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every single article published in magazines or newspapers concerning NXIVM or Keith Raniere is highly unflattering many have “Cult” in the title. This cutting and pasting of sentences taken out of context is nothing but misleading, Intentional misleading I might addLink1914 (talk) I may have to report you for being in violation of the NPOV rule.

Link, I need to ask for you to be a bit more civil to other editors on here. Claiming them to be intentionally misleading or threatening with reporting is inappropriate and will not help you in your efforts of bringing balance to an issue. Unfortunately if your claims of "all" published articles are reporting NXIVM as a cult is accurate, then this article will likely remain negative. We cannot accept original research or your own experience as authoritative on the subject. And while I have no direct understanding or knowledge of NXIVM, some organizations are a cult and most of them are also trying to avoid that labeling. I'm not suggesting they are a cult, but we must accept information from the reliable sources as they are presented and not synthesis our own conclusions or attempt to introduce bias under the guise of desiring a balanced article. I honestly have no opinion when it comes to NXIVM outside of the fact that the article remains properly cited with reliable sources, and that the editors do not engage in edit wars or are acting inappropriate towards eachother. Tiggerjay (talk) 23:27, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Civil try telling that to JamesLOLLink1914 (talk)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for your contributions to the article NXIVM!Chrisrus (talk) 05:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User account blocked indefinitely

Per message on his user page: This account is a sock puppet of Keyser Sözetigho and has been blocked indefinitely. Please refer to editing habits, contributions or the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer for evidence. This policy subsection may also be helpful. U21980 (talk) 17:45, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]