User talk:Flagrantedelicto

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Flagrantedelicto! Thank you for your contributions. I am Gigs and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Gigs (talk) 22:02, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

October 2012

Hello, I'm Toddy1. Another editor noticed that you made a change to an article, Yazid I, but you didn't provide a reliable source. The other editor removed it for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think he made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Toddy1 (talk) 08:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Toddy1. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Yazid I seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. In addition it was uncited If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Toddy1 (talk) 08:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Yazid I. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:50, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I do not think you understand the concept of citations. You should add reliable sources as citations which would allow someone to check that the information you added is valid and so they can find more information. Web sites, (preferably English, but other languages are acceptable), books, newspaper articles and such. You can see how the other citations on that page were added they begin with <ref> and end with </ref>. For example, if you were citing a book the way to do it would <ref>Smith, ''Book title'', 2nd edition, p21-2.</ref> This would show up as something like ^[3]. Clicking on that would take you to the references section and you would see "Smith, Book title, 2nd edition, p21-2.". You could then add some more details about the book to the list of sources.--Toddy1 (talk) 11:46, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Yazid I shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Favonian (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

When you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ~~~~.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Please do not put a level 2 heading in front of all your posts - when it is clear that they are just a continuation of previous discussions.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Warning for you disruptive editing on Ali

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ali, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. --SpidErxD (talk) 13:40, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Uncalled for remark

You wrote "With all due respect, please don't place me in the category of the people you have come across here on Wikipedia edit history and its ceaseless POV-pushing vandals." This remark is uncalled for. I have not made any personal attack on you. I treat you with respect. Please do the same for me.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Mark Antony's birthday

January 14 is the most widely accepted date for Antony's birth. There is at least one alternative date or time frame, but the way you're inserting the information is confusing: you're placing it before the footnote that verifies January 14. Huzar pp. 10–11 fails verification; these pages don't say anything about the date of Antony's birth. Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Mark Antony#Birthday. Cynwolfe (talk) 02:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

First or second Caliph of the Umayyad Dynasty

Please could we discuss the issue of whether Muawiyah was the first or second Caliph of the Umayyad Dynasty at Talk:Muawiyah I#First or second Caliph of the Umayyad Dynasty.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Personal information

Try to reveal another editor's real name again, and you'll be blocked so fast your head will spin. This is not a matter for discussion. Email me or the oversight team if you have any questions. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

You're making it worse. If you want to talk about this, email me or the oversight team. This is not to be discussed on Wikipedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

No I don't really see a need to discuss this. I made an unintentional error. I just didn't like the way you informed me of my accidental, unintentional revelation. Let's drop the matter here and now. My contributions on WP outweigh any undesired conflict. Is that understood (?) Flagrantedelicto (talk) 02:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

No, they don't. Contributions make no difference when it comes to violations in policy. Also, WP:CIVIL (which is a policy) might be worth a read. If you don't want to be blocked, I suggest you change your attitude now - "Is that understood" and "I am the last person you want to talk to that way, got it" could easily be taken as threats, and that is not the sort of behavior that is permitted, or allowed, on Wikipedia. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I see your point. Such responses from anyone does come across as threatening. I guess I need to not miss taking my High BP prescriptions in a timely manner (seriously, no humour intended). I will ease off. But keep in mind (for the record), it was fellow WP editor Cynwolfe who initiated the personal attacks by calling me "ignorant". This is a matter of open record which anyone can view in the Mark Anthony Talk Page section. And I forgot to add, me being warned that I will be blocked so fast that my head will spin could also be perceived as a threat (especially to someone with High BP medical condition). Keep that in mind, as well. Flagrantedelicto (talk) 03:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry I used such strong words. I was just trying to make absolutely sure you knew how serious a matter this was. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the apology. Thanks. Flagrantedelicto (talk) 00:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. I'm required to inform you about this report I made at ANI. Cynwolfe (talk) 02:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I have reopened my complaint at ANI. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Misleading edit summary

At Mark Antony you deleted[1] the text " (the calculation is described as including "room for judicious interpretation")" with an edit summary saying "Deleted entry as the recalculated date does have attribution: Classical scholar Max Georg Gerhard Radke; please see Talk Page for explanation." As the text that I added said nothing about attribution but was a comment (from Donna Hurley) on the recalculated date, your edit summary was clearly misleading. Please don't let this happen again. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 08:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013

Hello Flagrantedelicto. I am Diannaa and I am an administrator on this wiki. I have been reviewing your contributions on the Mark Anthony talk page as a result of the report posted at WP:ANI and can see some ongoing problems with the way you are handling the discussion there. Some examples of recent problematic edits, though virtually every edit you made on that page has contained veiled insults of some sort. This violates our policy of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. These are examples only:

• Jan 22: What part of this do you not understand (?) LOL ... You are not also Black Sword by any chance are you (?) LOL ... Just kidding
• Jan 23: Is that all you are hung up on (?) ... And you keep running circles ... For some reason it eludes you ... for some inexplicable reason you even tried to convince yourself ...
• Jan 23: You tried to get fresh over this. Once again, there you go embellishing...You are really displaying some type of inability to comprehend what you read. LOL
• anyone...can openly observe a slight propensity for embellishment and/or inaccuracy (by Cynwolfe)
• I am the one who suffers from a High BP medical condition...I hope no one else here (as in this particular discussion) also does. It is not a pleasant condition by any means

Questioning people's intelligence and motivation is a bad idea, and violates our WP:NPA policy. And asking them about their physical health is not done; it's quite simply none of your business, and is completely irrelevant to a content discussion on this wiki, even if you choose to first reveal information about your own health. Please focus your comments strictly on the content discussion, not on the other editors, their motivations, their health, or their level of intelligence. This is not an exhaustive list. Further violations of our WP:NPA policy could result in your account being blocked from editing. -- Dianna (talk) 04:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)