Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WLU (talk | contribs) at 21:11, 20 August 2008 (→August, 2008: read). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, Criminologist1963, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! <eleland/talkedits> 16:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

page blanking

Please do not blank pages or create content forks. There should be one article or section for each topic on wikipedia, so when satanic ritual abuse in the Netherlands redirects to list of satanic ritual abuse allegations#The Netherlands and the content has been merged there, there is no need for satanic ritual abuse and the Netherlands. Please use edit summaries to indicate why you are altering the content in the ways you are. To an uninvolved editor it looks like vandalism; to me it indicates either you are unfamiliar with content policies and guidelines or...I don't really have an or, except to venture disruption to make a point. Please engage on talk pages, if you've got a reason for your changes, post it on the talk page. Ask other editors for help, listen to their points and read and refer to policies and guidelines. Misplaced Pages is a community and you have to work with other editors. WLU (talk) 21:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

take a look...

at this discussion. We might after all include the info of SRA in Holland in the main article. If you have any comments, I would recommend you to post there. —Cesar Tort 02:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment

Hello Criminologist,

Consider that I have in excess of 26,000 contributions to wikipedia, and you have 79. You may be more aware of the situation in the Netherlands regarding satanic ritual abuse, but my grasp of wikipedia's policies and guidelines, which determines the content of pages, is probably better than yours. I can provide you a reason for every single edit I have made on all the pages I have edited, and am willing to do so. Please review the location of the current content (found at List of satanic ritual abuse allegations#The Netherlands) and identify what you believe was present in the old version that is missing in the new location. I am quite willing to discuss changes, but you must understand that no person 'owns' the contributions they have made to[REDACTED] (see Misplaced Pages:Ownership of articles) and changes must be made in keeping with the policies and guidelines. The policies and guidelines include a manual of style, tone of contributions, formatting for sections, naming of pages and sections, avoiding blank pages, proper citation formatting, a neutral point of view, avoiding content forking, avoiding original research, the use of reliable sources and verification of content. These together are the reasons I have been editing the page as I did, and undoing the changes you have made. You, and I, and all other editors on[REDACTED] must achieve consensus for changes and those changes must be in keeping with the policies and guidelines. My frustration with your edits is primarily due to most your reverts not having any reasoning in the edit summary or talk pages that indicates why you are making the changes, and what policies inform your changes.

Please feel free to discuss with me or other editors why you think the page should be changed, but please be specific and allow a chance for replies. Most of us are quite reasonable and willing to discuss, and most of us have very good reasons we do what we do. I will be happy to tell you why I have done what I have done, and if you think there is a reason to undo some of my, or someone else's changes, pleas tell us what it is. Give us a chance to say why it may not be a good idea and what a more acceptable alternative might be. Use the bold-revert-discuss cycle; we've both been bold, reverted, but the discussion has not occurred.

The issue with the page was not the sources being in Dutch, and non-english-language sources are allowed. The issues are in the above paragraph and for the most part the sources are irrelevant to those issues. Please discuss. Please start by reviewing the section "list of satanic ritual abuse allegations#The Netherlands" and contributing to the talk page in the "Talk:List of satanic ritual abuse allegations#The Netherlands" section. Thanks, WLU (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

August, 2008

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Misplaced Pages. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on list of satanic ritual abuse allegations. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. WLU (talk) 15:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Do not attack other editors because of their strict adherence to such Misplaced Pages principles as "no original research" and "neutral point of view". --Orange Mike | Talk 19:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of satanic ritual abuse allegations. 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. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you know what an admin is? Do you know that Orangemike is an admin? Do you know you can be blocked for edit warring? Have you read any of the policies that have been sent your way? Continue on your path and you will lose your ability, and credibility, to make any changes to wikipedia. I am not an admin, I can not block, but if you keep editing the way you are, you will be blocked, possibly in the near future. Stop. Read policies. Base your contributions and talk page arguments on policies and guidelines if you want them to last more than a day. Claiming expertise is extremely unconvincing on wikipedia, as is demanding to talk to a person rather than a pseudonym. WLU (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)