User talk:Werther Hartwig

Welcome!

Hello, Werther Hartwig, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Evelyn Wim, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! KungAvSand (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. KungAvSand (talk) 00:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Aibling rail accident

Hi Werther Hartwig, welcome to Wikipedia! Apologies for the overwhelming amount of notifications on this page. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and that means that the topics must be encyclopedic for them to be included. After years of discussion, the community has put forth a number of different guidelines we call notability that detail what qualities of a subject that might indicate suitability for inclusion. One such notability guideline deals with people who are notable for only one event. In such cases, it's generally preferable to discuss the person in the context of the event, rather than create a whole separate article for the person. I believe that this ought to be the case for the number of articles you created for the victims of the Bad Aibling rail accident. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Mz7 (talk) 00:26, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, as you did at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KungAvSand, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Please do not use other user pages as article space. RotubirtnoC (talk) 00:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning. stop your edit-warring now

Your recent editing history at Bad Aibling rail accident shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --PanchoS (talk) 00:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --PanchoS (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent disruptive editing. 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 ~~~~}}. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

Please discontinue adding a prominent list of victims of the recent Bad Aibling rail accident to pages across different languages of Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a strict policy regarding how we write about living and recently deceased people—specifically, Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.

We have this policy because we respect the privacy of the individuals close to the incident, such as the privacy of the families and friends of those who died. Do not reinsert the information without first 1) discussing it to reach a consensus, see Talk:Bad Aibling rail accident#Names of victims, and 2) providing references to reliable sources that verify the information. Thank you. Mz7 (talk) 04:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]