Skrakov

Welcome!

Hello, Skrakov! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 03:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC) Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Editing problems

In your recent edits to Climate change mitigation you added your content within a previous reference following the <ref> tag. Please be more careful. Additionally the howstuffworks.com article you were using is rather a poor source, please read WP:reliable sources. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 13:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Please study NPOV and RS before editing more

You're obviously interested in some issues that also interest me. However, your edits so far have been a botch job. First, please study WP:Neutral point of view; then study WP:Reliable sources; and then study WP:Citing sources. Otherwise most (all?) of your edits will be reverted by someone and you'll start to incur wrathful responses instead of welcoming and helping ones. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Discretionary sanction alert - climate change

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Repeated insertion into lead about scientific opinion

The article is about the scientific opinion. You keep on inserting stuff into the lead that is not covered in the article itself. The article is quite long enough without sticking in stuff that is already better handled elsewhere and it certainly shouldn't be stuck in the lead when the article doesn't describe anything about what is said. The lead should summarize the article. Dmcq (talk) 18:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)