User talk:Romper

Welcome!

Hello, Romper, 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:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Just H 00:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help me request

I tried to expand this page Ethnic groups of the United Kingdom but only half of my edit shows up. What have I done wrong??? :-(

The ref tags weren't closed properly. I fixed it, [1]. —Centrx→talk • 02:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English people

Ok let's not start an edit war. Your opinion about recent immigrants not being ethnicaly English has been discussed ad infinitum on the English people talk page. There is no consensus one way or the other, but no one has yet provided any evidence that people of Jewish, Indian, Pakistani or West Indian descent cannot consider themselves English. Ethnicity is a complicated concept, but essentially it is about identity. I ask you to read this archive from the English people talk page. If you feel strongly about this then I ask that you re-open this discussion on the talk page. I also ask that you bear in mind that people can have multiple ethnicities and can identify as having membership of many socio-cultural groups. There is an element of ethnicity that is about descent, but it is not a requirement, and most definitions only mention "perceived descent" rather than actual descent. All the best. Alun 06:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Source

Deleting well sourced and cited information valuable to showing the realities of Anglo-Indians in Britain amounts censorship. Please show multiple scholarly/academic sources that Distinguish Indian And British Marriage practices and names,FROM 1700-1945, because I can find any.

The Reverts are SOURCED well and pertain to the relevant section (marriages between Indians and British). It is well established that Indian Traders, Settlers, Workers, Soldiers, and other Indian males intermarried with British in India and Britain in the sources, can you disclaim they weren't Anglo-Indians? Can't make it one-sided... That's Bias. User:Cosmos416 17:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of parties contesting the United Kingdom general election, 2010

[2] - Yes, but it is number of candidates in United Kindom not in England and Wales. BTW, Yahoo is wrong. It is 338.

British National Party

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on British National Party. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.

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.
Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
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 wording, and content 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 edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. TFD (talk) 04:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Anglo-Indian. 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. HalfShadow 00:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Anglo-Indian, 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. Charles (talk) 13:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2012

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Anglo-Indian. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you've taken this up on the talk page--good. I also see that you haven't returned to the article--that's also good. It's protected now by another admin. I think you should seek another recourse; I mean "you" in the plural, but your counterpart is not listening. WP:DR is another candidate where you can lay out your case. This long-term edit war has to stop, of course. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. I shall cease edit-warring and attempt to resolve this. My sincere apologies for causing you to expend your time on this. Romper (talk) 03:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I notice that you removed topically-relevant content from Fisting. However, Wikipedia is not censored to remove content that might be considered objectionable. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 05:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I need help!

Working for some time on wikipedia, I am Brazilian and I am trying to highlight the article Mariah Carey, urgently need a photo of her with an award, this more accurate it needs to be published in order to be charged in Brazil. If you can help or know someone who could, I would be very grateful. Good editions! JamisonCarey (talk) 18:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Romper. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Romper. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Romper. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]