AssociateAffiliate (talk | contribs) |
Alexandre8 (talk | contribs) →November 2011: removing nonsense. |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
:My computer is playing up massively, I just was just writing a longish piece and it just crashed. My ability to get this done quickly is now jepordised, will get a technician to have a look at it over Christmas. Every time I open up a few pages or more for quoting it just freezes. Will try my best for the moment with just opening two at a time. If you could removed the offending material yourself I'd be much appreciated. Thanks [[User:Alexandre8|Alexandre8]] ([[User talk:Alexandre8#top|talk]]) 01:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC) |
:My computer is playing up massively, I just was just writing a longish piece and it just crashed. My ability to get this done quickly is now jepordised, will get a technician to have a look at it over Christmas. Every time I open up a few pages or more for quoting it just freezes. Will try my best for the moment with just opening two at a time. If you could removed the offending material yourself I'd be much appreciated. Thanks [[User:Alexandre8|Alexandre8]] ([[User talk:Alexandre8#top|talk]]) 01:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC) |
||
: Have just had a look and can't find the sources in the main body. Could you show me please. thanks. [[User:Alexandre8|Alexandre8]] ([[User talk:Alexandre8#top|talk]]) 02:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC) |
: Have just had a look and can't find the sources in the main body. Could you show me please. thanks. [[User:Alexandre8|Alexandre8]] ([[User talk:Alexandre8#top|talk]]) 02:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC) |
||
== November 2011 == |
|||
[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=|link=]] Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the [[WP:3RR|three-revert rule]], or that you may have already broken it. 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. '''Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a [[WP:BLOCK|block]].''' |
|||
If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's [[WP:TALK|talk page]] to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. You may still be blocked for [[WP:EDITWAR|edit warring]] even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Xijky|Xijky]] ([[User talk:Xijky|talk]]) 12:17, 26 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 17:33, 26 November 2011
SEMI-RETIRED
Mistaken AutoBlock
Your autoblock should be cleared now. Edit the sandbox or something to be sure. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:53, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Maunus is only human)) sometimes mistakes happen lol. Alexandre8 (talk) 00:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Oops again. I guess I am All too human!·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Hibernia
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--Steven J. Anderson (talk) 02:05, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Re: Be careful
I've given up trying to formulate a good article from that one, as those editing it seem to have an agenda against the article subject. Seems a game of fitting in as much "right-wing extremism", "xenophobia" and "racism" remarks as possible, rather than writing a NPOV article. Sad really. You and I both said a passing reference (from a source who has a political bias) wouldn't do, but the agenda-squad don't seem interested in quality sourcing, only enforcing their BBC, career politican created narrow view of the subject.
What you've put on the talk page of the article is spot on! If you already have a hatred of something, then how can your work possibly be neutral, let alone used a source on a site which is meant to be neutral?!?!?!?! Having been through the "reknowned" British education system, an "educator" becomes respected by the establishment for simply having pro-establishment, often socialist leanings. If you hold such views, you'll become "respected"! I do love the "racist" remarks though. Guess that's why the nephew of the former Prime Minister of Guyana has recently joined the party. I guess when people fear a movement, they lie about it and try to paint it in bad light. Regards. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 10:56, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- I don't envy your task in trying to get that article at least semi-decent! Seems unfortunately agenda led editors will constantly bombard that page with their person misconceptions. Best of luck anyway! Regards. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
UKIP
Anti-islamic is sourced in the main body of the article. Its not normal to put sources in the lede. You might want to self-revert --Snowded TALK 00:55, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
- My computer is playing up massively, I just was just writing a longish piece and it just crashed. My ability to get this done quickly is now jepordised, will get a technician to have a look at it over Christmas. Every time I open up a few pages or more for quoting it just freezes. Will try my best for the moment with just opening two at a time. If you could removed the offending material yourself I'd be much appreciated. Thanks Alexandre8 (talk) 01:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
- Have just had a look and can't find the sources in the main body. Could you show me please. thanks. Alexandre8 (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC)