User talk:Silver123456789

Welcome!

Hello, Silver123456789, 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 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! --Geniac (talk) 21:07, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Oh Oh looks like I did something wrong :( An editor has undone all my work and marked it as: "Massive POV chunk removed".

Could you have a look and offer some suggestions on how I can salvage this? POV is obviously Point of View... But I did reference from a reputable source e.g. a British Government ran web site that hosted the petition; TB-L himself and PCPRO as a second source for conformation. I was in the process of adding cite refs and was about half done, but even the quotes not cite ref'd yet did have a reference link.

Cheers. -- Silver123456789 ► 19:08, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll take a look. He was referring to WP:NPOV; you might want to read that. I'll report back later. -- Chzz ► 20:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the revert, I would say that the first section (Berners-Lee) is fine, but the second part (re. the petition) would be classed as WP:OR, because it only had the primary source as a reference. For example, if I created a petition stating "Sausages were evil", and then wrote an article about sausages being evil, referencing my petition, it wouldn't be permitted. I would have to wait until BBC News reported on the petition. In your case, googling news sites showed me about 3 suitable secondary references; I'd use these; ISP review the reg VUnet

As it might be considered contentious, I would suggest that you suggest the edit in the article talk page, and then ask the user that reverted it if he now agreed that it was now OK.

Regarding the first bit, rather than reinstate the reverted edit, I've asked the reverting editor if he agrees with my view, and if he does, I'll put it back in.

Hope that answers your question,

If you need further help please write on my own talk page, as I won't monitor your page.

Thanks, -- Chzz ► 21:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help :) -- Silver123456789 ► 20:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Petition

Looks good to me. Add it, with all the citations.

If you get any grief, let me know. -- Chzz ► 02:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]