→Vandalism warning #2: Ownership and WP:POINT
|
|
||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
::You're not editing a page in the article namespace. The page you have been editing is the anti-war topics [[Wikipedia:Navigational templates|template]], which appears on many pages besides that one [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Anti-war_topics]. Your blanking of the template in its entirety is considered [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]], which we ask that you do not do. Removing the template from the [[Conscientious objector]] page is a different process entirely, and should only be done if there is adequate [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to do so. I believe that the most appropriate place for discussion of that would be at [[Talk:Conscientious objector]]. Let me know if you have any more questions. [[User:Schuminweb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User_talk:Schuminweb|Talk]]) 15:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC) |
::You're not editing a page in the article namespace. The page you have been editing is the anti-war topics [[Wikipedia:Navigational templates|template]], which appears on many pages besides that one [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Anti-war_topics]. Your blanking of the template in its entirety is considered [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]], which we ask that you do not do. Removing the template from the [[Conscientious objector]] page is a different process entirely, and should only be done if there is adequate [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to do so. I believe that the most appropriate place for discussion of that would be at [[Talk:Conscientious objector]]. Let me know if you have any more questions. [[User:Schuminweb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User_talk:Schuminweb|Talk]]) 15:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
:So you consider consensus over accuracy or apparent political vandalism? The Peace Sign is grafitti and has no place here. |
|||
[[User:Tomtrinity7|Tomtrinity7]]15:18, 8 February 2006 (Switzerland) |
|||
== Vandalism warning #2 == |
== Vandalism warning #2 == |
Hello, I'm [[User:{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}]]. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User talk:{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|my talk page]]. Thanks!
Please do not blank the anti-war topics template any further. Kalkin 17:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
Please refrain from blanking Template:Anti-war topics in the future. As JK the unwise already mentioned, Template talk:Anti-war topics would be a fine place to discuss the issues you're having with the template in a civil manner. SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tomtrinity715:18, 8 February 2006 (Switzerland)
Admin, I have a question for you. Say you have a business and someone comes by and spraypaints a Swastika on the outside of the building. Since the owner of the shop does not sell any products related to Nazis then the person would have the grafitti removed. This is the same thing, this placement has nothing to do with Conscientious Objection. I challenge you to take a closer look and discover that the "true vandals" are those posting this information on a topic that claims no political or movement affiliations. There is no civil manner with Swastikas, so why is the Liberal Swastika tolerated. If this is the case I claim the right to place a Bush-Cheney 2004 bumpersticker on the page to show that conscientious objection has nothing to do with the Peace Movement or songs, slogans, etc. against a war they do not care for. As the only true Conscientious Objector contributing to this page, you would do a great disservice bowing to their threats. As Wikipedia states: "Do not come here if you do not want someone merclilessly editing you." I am exercising this option. Tomtrinity7 (Talk) 13:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]