User talk:Mayamore
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below.
February 2009
[edit]
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to South Korea, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Your recent edit has removed navigational tools (dablinks) and sources from the article, as well as content. Furthermore, based on the version of the article you are reverting to, and the edit summary you are quoting, I have reason to believe you are the same person as User:Manmohit2002 and User:Ziggymaster, who is blocked indefinitely. Is this true? rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, please look at the talk page before going and reverting. There as been an extended discussion about cleaning up the article, including removing peacock and non-neutral language from the article. As for the images, it is a standard writing guideline on Wikipedia not to force image sizes. In general, you have been reverting to a version that doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines, is full of POV language, is lacking navigational aids, and is full of bad sources (dead links, and pages that don't actually support the text in the article). By reverting to that bad version you are undoing weeks worth of hard work by people who have been bending over backwards to improve the article. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Having said that, I haven't seen much of an "improvement" over the manmohit version, other than that people downsized images and removed sourced facts. The weasel words must be out, but removing sourced contents is unacceptable, unless proper reason with consensus is given. Like the Korean Air cargo fact, for example. Anyway, I will revert it as you wish. Mayamore (talk) 00:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- The Korea Air thing was removed because the statement in the article claimed it was the biggest cargo-carried in the world, and the source actually said otherwise. Likely, the rest of the "sourced content" that has been removed was where the sources were not reliable, or the content was otherwise not informative and just put in there to boast. Again, I recommend that you read the numerous discussions at Talk:South Korea, where you will find reasons for all the edits that have been made. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- And, by the way, in this edit your summary claimed that you were reverting back to the version before your edits, but in fact you left some of your edits in (such as changing the cited information about the Korean border to the un-cited and uninformative "South Korea is now working towards a peaceful reunification with North Korea."). Please try not to use misleading edit summaries in the future. Thank you, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Having said that, I haven't seen much of an "improvement" over the manmohit version, other than that people downsized images and removed sourced facts. The weasel words must be out, but removing sourced contents is unacceptable, unless proper reason with consensus is given. Like the Korean Air cargo fact, for example. Anyway, I will revert it as you wish. Mayamore (talk) 00:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- You have removed a clearly sourced fact and this constitutes to WP:V. The source clearly states Korean Air is the largest cargo airline by Scheduled international freight tonne-kilometres flown. See World's largest airlines. I am reverting this fact or any other fact that you deliberately removed despite being properly sourced. Mayamore (talk) 01:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Blocked indefinitely - sockpuppet of User:Ziggymaster
[edit]There is credible evidence that you are a sockpuppet of banned user User:Ziggymaster. It is extremely clear from your behavior that you are not a new Wikipedia editor - you are using techniques and commentary and your familiarity with pages is that of an experienced user, and yet your account was created today. That in and of itself is not justification to ban. However, your edits have been identified as being identical in topic area and content with those made by Ziggymaster and other confirmed sockpuppets of that account.
The combination of those factors leads to a conclusion that you are in fact just another returning identity of Ziggymaster. Accordingly, this account has been blocked with no expiration. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below.