Revision as of 01:49, 7 December 2008 editCordless Larry (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators56,547 edits →Cypriot British: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:12, 7 December 2008 edit undoCordless Larry (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators56,547 edits 3RRNext edit → | ||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
:I have added nothing of kind. All of my information is from reliable community sources. You are distorting history and numerical data which you simple do not understand.--] (]) 01:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC) | :I have added nothing of kind. All of my information is from reliable community sources. You are distorting history and numerical data which you simple do not understand.--] (]) 01:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
::I'm sorry but it's clear that is not fully referenced. ] (]) 01:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC) | ::I'm sorry but it's clear that is not fully referenced. ] (]) 01:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
{{uw-3rr}} |
Revision as of 02:12, 7 December 2008
|
Greek Britons
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Greek Britons. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- You reverted the article back again without even bothering to read the additional references I added. That is completely dishonest. If you don't trust London Greek Radio, The National Federation of Cypriots in the UK the Greek Orthodox Church or Cyprus national broadcasted RIK then you should prove that they are not reliable sources on the history and population numbers of Greeks living in the UK. The consensus around all of these organisations is that there are over 400,000 Greek Britons and 300,000 of them reside in Greater London. --Pankration2008 (talk) 23:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- Calculating the number of Cypriot-born people in the UK who are likely to be Greek based on the population distribution of the island is original research. I notified you of this on the article talk page but you still went ahead and restored it. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, then I will remove those calculations. The other estimates from the above organisations are still valid and are not original research.--Pankration2008 (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- The point is that all you've done is state the name of an organisation. That doesn't constitute a reference. Please see Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. Cordless Larry (talk) 00:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- Neither does simply stating "2001 UK Census". Please provide full details including a URL if possible. Cordless Larry (talk) 00:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- The point is that all you've done is state the name of an organisation. That doesn't constitute a reference. Please see Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. Cordless Larry (talk) 00:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, then I will remove those calculations. The other estimates from the above organisations are still valid and are not original research.--Pankration2008 (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- Calculating the number of Cypriot-born people in the UK who are likely to be Greek based on the population distribution of the island is original research. I notified you of this on the article talk page but you still went ahead and restored it. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Cypriot British
Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Cypriot British. Doing so violates Misplaced Pages's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Cordless Larry (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have added nothing of kind. All of my information is from reliable community sources. You are distorting history and numerical data which you simple do not understand.--Pankration2008 (talk) 01:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but it's clear that this edit is not fully referenced. Cordless Larry (talk) 01:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.