User talk:Papanoel2010

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Papanoel2010, 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Enti342 MEMO 19:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Automatic Undo

Hi! I am not an administrator, however just a regular contributor. I currently work with the Abuse Team and the Anti-Vandalism team. User:majorclanger Is another contributor whom undid your edits for any reason, including:

Your edits were incorrect
You were showing a Point of View
Your edits could have been vandalism

If you feel that the removal of your edits was false, You can talk to him via his TalkPage.

Feel free to send me another message should you have any questions! Also, remember to add four tildes (~~~~) after any messages you leave so that we can figure out who sent them!

Thanks! Enti342 MEMO 20:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, neither of the 3 points you mentioned applies. So how come there is such an interest in this page?? And WHO has the right to question my edits? What I am editing is the TRUTH. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papanoel2010 (talk • contribs)

Again, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Did you provide a valuable source? Hazard-SJ^Talk 22:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ken Cuccinelli. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 21:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is very interesting to find out about WIKIPEDIA! Supposedly, everyone has the right to edit, create, delete whatever info. Now I have edited 2 times a section that should not even belong where it is, and I have CORRECTED a false statement about another person (J. Soring). This person in question HAS always maintained his innocence, which is a FACT, and second, the decision of the person the page is about (Mr Cuccinelli) and the VA. governor was indeed highly controversial and scandalous (never happened before in US history and is subject of ongoing diplomatic and judicial deliberations). Now WHO has the right to DELETE those facts?? Is there a thought police or big brother(hood) within Wikipedia? Seems to be so! How come that within 5 (five!) minutes some people come out of the woodwork and UNDO my edits? And who are you, for that matter? Wikipedia claims there is no central auditor or editor, so why would you have any say-so over me or anyone?

Talkback

Hello, Papanoel2010. You have new messages at Jauerback's talk page.
Message added 12:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

It Takes Time

While it is true that anyone can edit most Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia has special rules for articles covering controversial topics. Earlier this year, somebody created a bunch of new editor accounts and repeatedly tried to rewrite the Ken Cuccinelli article by replacing factual sentences with fluffy quotes from press releases from his web site. In response, Wikipedia place special restrictions on the article. Now, anyone can submit proposed changes, but those changes must be verified by another experienced editor before they go live.

Over time, you can earn experienced editor status. In the meantime, please try to include references or citations in your proposed edits to support what you are adding. For example, rather than you saying that the case was controversial, quote a newspaper as calling it that and drop a footnote to where the quote can be found.

We appreciate your participation in Wikipedia, but you need to learn the ropes in order to become effective within the organization. Best wishes. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 11:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]