User talk:Mitredestructor2

Hello, Mitredestructor2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Kallistos Ware does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Narsil (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a talk section about this issues, on Talk:Kallistos_Ware#Claims_about_Kallistos.27s_relation_with_ROCOR. Please discuss the matter there instead of just reverting the Kallistos Ware page and/or adding the claims into different sections in the article. Thanks! -- Narsil (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING - blogs and other self-published sources are not "reliable sources"

Hello, your additions to the article on Kallistos Ware have been relying on an unreliable source, anything from ROCOR. The home page specifically denies that the site has editorial control and explicitly says the authors of each post are solely responsible for the post's content. As a result, all material from the ROCOR fails our criteria for reliable sources, and in particular the part about self published sources, unless, that is, you can convince us one of the exceptions applies. As for the alleged comment by some user purporting to be Kllistos Ware at the bottom of the blog post, that could have just as easily been added by myself under that name as the man himself. Therefore, there is no evidence that the self-description exception applies.

No harm so far, everyone has to learn.

However, now that you know about the RS and SELFPUB rules, continuing to add material based on anything from ROCOR or other self-published sources might be construed as disruptive and to prevent this, our administrators could eventually decide to block your editing privieleges for awhile. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the site at issue (www.rocorstudies.org) isn't actually the official website of ROCOR (or of anyone else). An official ROCOR website would be considered reliable--at least, it would be a reliable source for ROCOR's positions. But rocorstudies.org can't be considered a "reliable source" by WP standards for anything but its authors' opinions. -- Narsil (talk) 18:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, makes sense. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING - Edit warring

Instead of edit warring, you have lost of options under WP:DR. I recommend Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for starters.

///////////////////

Your recent editing history at Kallistos Ware shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANI, I asked for you to be blocked for 1 week

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Hilarion (Alfeyev), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 00:06, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Kallistos Ware. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Elizium23 (talk) 00:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]