User talk:Ophelia S
Welcome!
[edit]Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Simplified Manual of Style
Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
- Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
- Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
- Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
- No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
- If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
- Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
- Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.
The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! S Philbrick(Talk) 22:40, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Minor edits
[edit]Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits by Wikipedia's criteria. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Doug Weller talk 09:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
May 2018
[edit]Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Constanzo Beschi. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 11:38, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
May 29 2018
[edit]You have said "You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Constanzo Beschi." I would like to point out YOU are the one removing my credible source and adding 'dubious' there. There are no other editors in this page. You may have a problem with Ananda Vikatan magazine as a source. But what is your justification for removing the source to the original book written by Beschi in 1891 (Thonnool Vilakkam). It is a book preserved by the govt of Tamil Nadu in the Connemara Public library, one of the four National Depository Libraries in India. "Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page" - There is no preferred version here. The version mentioned is a historical FACT with the original book still preserved. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount- so kindly stop removing proper sources to suit your views. --Ophelia S (talk) 11:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- Being in a national library confers no privileges, the National Depository Centre includes everything with an ISBN, no matter how serious or crazy the book is. All it means is that it has an ISBN number. That doesn't make a reliable or even suitable source. Doug Weller talk 08:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)