User talk:Sarah Shapiro

Welcome!

Hello, Sarah Shapiro, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Naomi Ragen

Do you have a relation with this topic or the person she plagiarized author Sarah Shapiro? I'm worried about a conflict of interest. Will post on article Talk as well, thanks.TeeVeeed (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)TeeVeeed (talk) 20:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)add heading[reply]

I think the Noami Ragen page is quite fine now, and would like to ask you to take a step back. No need to refine it any further. Debresser (talk) 09:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't reply to the request to explain whether you have a conflict of interest on this page, I will ask for administrator to restrict your editing privileges. You are exaggerating! Debresser (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Per your admitted conflict of interest, as expressed in the edit summary I am trying to set the record straight for myself and the other two litigants, please review WP:COI, and be aware that your edits will be scrutinized tenfold. Debresser (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In view of your latest edits, I have recommended at WP:ANI that you be banned form the Naomi Ragen article. Feel free to make your case there at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sarah_Shapiro. Debresser (talk) 14:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm Zamaster4536. An edit that you recently made to Naomi Ragen seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Zamaster4536 (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Temporarily blocked from editing

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 10 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

This block is related to your edits at the Naomi Ragen page; Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, including not over-emphasising their subjects' involvement in controversies, and actively seeking to "set the record straight" for yourself (I'm talking about this edit) is not at all permitted. The immediate cause for the block was your continued edits to the article after the warning just above this message: you must not continue making significant changes to this specific article, although you're free to propose improvements at Talk:Naomi Ragen. Finally Please note that you're allowed to edit elsewhere on Wikipedia as soon as the block expires (approximately 3AM Israeli time, if I've calculated this correctly); just stay away from editing articles about Ragen and anyone else with whom you may be in a dispute. Nyttend (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Someone pointed out to me this edit that followed the block. Please stop editing this article; any further edits of the sort will result in a longer block. Nyttend (talk) 23:32, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Cousins

Also, please be advised that you edited this article about your relative/yourself-as noted in the edit summaries, and that is generally against COI-Conflict of interest policy for Wikipedia, and also referencing/source, original research-(OR) policies. Please familiarize yourself with WP COI, and in the future, articles where you would like to assist where you have a relation, ask for changes on the talk page of the article, do not edit them yourself, and disclose that you have a COI or personal relationship with the topic-thank-youTeeVeeed (talk) 20:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please know that after unintentionally violating your rules more than once while trying to provide corrections to one of your articles, I realize that the place for me is on the sidelines. I think that for those who are familiar with the Wikipedia vocabulary and system, and know how to navigate through this realm of Cyberspace, it is hard to imagine just how computer-ignorant a 20th-century writer such as myself can be.

This has been my first involvement with Wikipedia. Until such time as I learn how to insert and delete sentences according to your rules, correct typos and misspellings, and correctly post links to the external sources without finding myself in a minefield, I should leave such tasks to others more adept than I.

Sarah Shapiro January 31, 2016

Sarah Shapiro (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah Shapiro,

You may find the Tea House or the Wikipedia tutorial a good place to start with learnign how the ins and outs of Wikipedia work. Amortias (T)(C) 23:00, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please also notice that nobody has any problems with the technical quality of your edits, rather that as a rule a project that strives to be an encyclopedia has a problem with edits from editors who are too much personally involved in what they are doing here. Debresser (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stern warning

You again tried to change the number of sentences from 25 to 29. The source says 25, so regardless of what you perceive to be the truth, you can not change that. Since you have been warned about this before, please be aware that repetition of this specific edit will likely lead to a very long editing block from Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]