User talk:Wikisurfer61

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Talk:Jesse Jackson. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. The biographies of living persons policy states that "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space." I've therefore removed your allegations about Jackson for now. If you repost them, please locate sources first and include them with your post. Thanks. Clubjuggle ^T/C 01:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you state that "every time I try to make a correction to the page, it gets reverted, even though I post links to interviews with all of the witnesses!" Can you link me to diffs of your previous attempts to add the information? Thanks, --Clubjuggle ^T/C 01:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not exactly sure how to do that!Wikisurfer61 (talk) 06:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jesse Jackson. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Ward3001 (talk) 20:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When one violates the 3RR rule, they can be blocked from editing. Don't let this happen to you. In Wikipedia, one's edits can be removed by others. However, try to take the moral high ground and not keep reverting (changing back) to your edit. There are ways for dispute resolution if you honestly feel that your edit is reasonable and the other person's is not. Chergles (talk) 22:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. I am learning, albeit slowly. I couldn't understand why someone kept reverting my edits without giving a reason for doing so, but now I think I've figured out the talk page thing. Another oddity was that someone archived the page, removing the talk section on Education altogether for a short time, but now it's back!Wikisurfer61 (talk) 06:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good job clarifying JJ/MLK

Thanks for improving my language about the disputes over Jesse Jackson's account of the assassination of MLK. Some recent additions had language that was not encyclopedic in tone and that interjected to much editor POV. My efforts to improve tone, unfortunately, were not sufficiently precise in explaining the issue. Adding the phrase "his personal involvement" definitely helps clarify the nature of the disagreement between JJ and other King associates. LotLE×talk 01:44, 25 July 2008 (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 or 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 they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:20, 9 January 2013 (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) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]