User talk:Visitor10001

Welcome

Welcome!

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:

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 possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page to follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons' policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring and sock puppetry.
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. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

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! Veriss (talk) 08:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Redemption movement. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Veriss (talk) 08:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Redemption movement. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Veriss (talk) 08:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unilateral edits to Redemption movement

Please engage the community on Talk:Redemption movement and work to establish a consensus before unilaterally blanking or removing content and please use edit summaries when making controversial edits. Sincerely, Veriss (talk) 08:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I thought I did all of that, as the talk page clearly shows.Visitor10001 (talk) 08:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are getting the hang of it, great! I may not always agree with your views but I support your right to be heard and that of your views to be considered. I wish you the best of luck in your Wikipedia career. Sincerely, Veriss (talk) 09:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I respect that a lot. Thanks for showing me the proper procedures to edit pages. I certainly didn't want to be a "vandal". Cheers. Visitor10001 (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the article again this evening and attempting to set aside my personal views, I took a few steps. I tagged the article as POV due to serious lack of sourcing and citations to back up its hostile tone towards the movement. I also tagged the theory section as needing improvement on citations and sources. Further, I made an initial attempt at rewriting the lead to be more neutral but I did also add the section front and center warning readers that followers have been convicted of serious crimes. Finally, I added a currently empty subsection to the theory section where editors who are inclined to, can present their view of the movement with less conflict with the editors who support the government view.

These changes should help address what I think are some of your concerns and also provide a structure for you and like-minded editors to present your views as well. Also, I started two new discussion sections on the talk page to hopefully restart discussions concerning POV and balance in a more civil tone.

Let me know if this helps or if I missed something. Best, Veriss (talk) 07:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:49, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redemption

I've taken this to the NPOV noticeboard. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 06:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good! Maybe they can keep a NPOV, unlike what you've recently done.

March 2011

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your edits to articles, such as the edit you made to Talk:Redemption movement. This is a common mistake to make and has probably already been corrected. There is no need to sign your edits to article content, as the article's edit history serves the function of attributing contributions, so you only need to use your signature to make discussions more readable, such as on article talk pages or project pages such as the Village Pump. If you would like further information about distinguishing types of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. You've been templated for this already, please try to remember to sign your posts with four x ~ Veriss (talk) 06:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Informational note: this is to let you know that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 09:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV and personal attacks

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Redemption movement, you may be blocked from editing. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:Redemption movement. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Visitor10001, please do NOT post personal attacks directed towards an editor on Wikipedia. Save those for a forum, not here. This applies anywhere in wikipedia. You're posting on a fringe topic that is generally regarded by mainstream sources as promoting illegal schemes. Wikipedia articles do follow NPOV, but that doesn't mean what you think it does. Neutral means that articles reflect the prevailing views as reflected by sources. But seriously, you need to stop the personal attacks - I removed the one you left on the Redemption theory talk page. Keep the attacks up, and an admin will probably end up blocking you and then you'll have zero chance to present your side. Ravensfire (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sovereign citizen movement

Sorry for spamming your talk page, but I try to post messages that explain some of the policies that Wikipedia has to editors like yourself. You're new, and there are a LOT of rules and guidelines, some of which can be easy to violate and end up causing trouble for you. Aside from the NPA (No Personal Attack) above, you also really need to know about the 3RR and Edit War policies. An edit war is when multiple editors are reverting each others changes in an article, usually with no or minimal discussion on the talk page. When there is discussion, the sides keep reverting as the discussion is going on. That doesn't help improve the article and often makes the situation worse. Eventually, editors start to cross the 3RR, or 3 revert, line. This means that they have made three reverts to the article in a day. When this happens, editors get blocked. It's a pretty hard and fast rule. If there's one editor being reverted by multiple people, it's really easy for that one person to the only one blocked (they revert 4 times, 2 people revert them twice each). On your recent edit to the Sovereign citizen movement, you commented that "Thanks, and I will be standing by to undo any edits! Have a nice day." To most editors, that means you're going to edit-war over the material. That's a bad thing.

You need to use the talk page to discuss edits. The process is supposed to be BRD or Bold, Revert, Discuss. Be bold and make the edit, and when another editor reverts your edit, you discuss it. Post options on the talk page, try to work towards a compromise but most important, understand their concerns and the policies they are using to support those concerns. If it's poorly worded, get it better. If it's unsourced or editors say the source isn't a RS, post sources and get a better understanding of what a good source is. The onus is on you to support your edits, and hopefully to get a better understanding of how Wikipedia works and how you can best use it.

Hope this helps you some, and good luck! Ravensfire (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EXCUSE ME, but if you actually read the talk page you would see that I HAVE BEEN TRYING SO VERY HARD TO ABIDE BY THESE RULES!! I am engaging the discussion group in meaningful debate. And I have been attacked, and my edits 'silently' reverted without good cause!! Please pay attention to what is actually happening before 'spamming my talk page'. HELLO!?!??!?! Visitor10001 (talk) 09:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should do what other editors have done, and create multiple accounts to get by the various rules of Wikipedia. Visitor10001 (talk) 03:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Informational note: this is to let you know that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven J. Anderson (talk • contribs)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing privileges have been suspended indefinitely

Your response to being advised of the block for incivility is inappropriate and rather than a non characteristic outburst is simply a further example of your antagonistic style of interaction. To ensure that you do not continue in the same vein I have also withdrawn your ability to edit your talkpage. Any unblock request will have to be via the ArbCom unblock email facility. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]