Revision as of 10:31, 10 September 2007 editChazzj (talk | contribs)89 edits →September 2007← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:32, 10 September 2007 edit undoChazzj (talk | contribs)89 edits →Please review WP:ELNext edit → | ||
Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
Umm, if you don't follow policy you start to attract the below warnings...which could result in a blocking. '''<font face="Kristen ITC">]</font>''' 10:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | Umm, if you don't follow policy you start to attract the below warnings...which could result in a blocking. '''<font face="Kristen ITC">]</font>''' 10:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
::Rambling again, mate, specify which part of the policy i have violated not just links | |||
== September 2007 == | == September 2007 == |
Revision as of 10:32, 10 September 2007
Three revert rule
Regarding the John Howard article, if you haven't already seen it, please read WP:3RR. Thanks. --Merbabu 10:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Welcome
|
John Howard
If you really want to know why your additions are removed, then look thru the welcome template above (try WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:RS for starters), or perhaps the quickest way to get an explanation would be to raise the issue on the article's talk page.--Merbabu 13:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I disagree the facts are published and verifiable with the court number....have a good times legal searching
Chazzj 09:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Kangaroo Court undos
Hi, I undid the addition of the "Prime Example" under Kangaroo Court because the criticism added doesn't belong here. Coughinink 03:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
A prime example of a kangaroo court system is the Australian Federal Court system and institutionalised discrimination, encouraged and authorised by the president of the HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, John von Doussa.
well you have to do better than just "your" opinion ....
Chazzj 09:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Please review WP:EL
Can I suggest that you make yourself aware of why blogs, newsgroups, bbs and the like aren't consider, reliably sources (for a start) nor does Misplaced Pages like linking to them. You aren't making things helpful for yourself by engaging in what Misplaced Pages calls an edit war. Shot info 10:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Unless you have evidence why a court number isnt reliable, you are blowing hot air and stop stalking me loser Chazzj 10:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- This suggests that you haven't read the policies that Misplaced Pages takes very seriously. There is no court number, this is a blog. And per Misplaced Pages policy it will be removed. What you need to do is find a better location for your source. Also, keep cool and please don't call people names. You could be blocked for that. Shot info 10:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK the next time there is a court number u had better keep away Chazzj 10:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- We are all here to make Misplaced Pages a better place. I'm only trying to help you here. If you don't want my help, hey, that's fine. Shot info 10:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- well then lemme teach you something about discrimination Chazzj 10:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Umm, if you don't follow policy you start to attract the below warnings...which could result in a blocking. Shot info 10:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Rambling again, mate, specify which part of the policy i have violated not just links
September 2007
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Misplaced Pages articles. Doing so violates Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. DarkFalls 10:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- there is a point of view to be decided by the Federal Court Itself, aint u curious to hear it? Chazzj 10:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)