Etimm
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Namibia article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
July 2013
edit Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Namibia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Reatlas. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Namibia because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. — Reatlas (talk) 11:32, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Etimm, I reverted your recent addition. Please take a bit of advice: If multiple editors revert your edits and leave a warning at your user talk page, that usually means that there is something wrong with your edits. No need to re-insert them, because they will be reverted again, and this might get you blocked. The section on "German rule" in the Namibia article is unbalanced, no doubt. But it is well referenced, and the change that is needed is certainly not the satirising of the existing prose within the article. If you have a suggestion of how to improve the wording and/or coverage, please discuss it at Talk:Namibia until you get a bit of experience of what is accepted, and how to edit without making syntax errors. Thanks and best regards, Pgallert (talk) 07:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)