Welcome!
Hello, Tony.wallace.nz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Hi there Tony, I thought I'd draw to your attention that Wikipedia is supposed to be built on verifiable facts. That is achieved by providing references. That's the theory, at least. In practice, there's lots of unverified material in all sorts of articles. Another fact, though, is that adding unreferenced material to articles of controversial nature runs a risk of that material being removed by another editor simply on the fact that it lacks references. Hence, I suggest that you review Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, as it's rather frustrating to see one's work disappear again. Schwede 66 03:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Tea Tape scandal, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. — Andrew s talk 04:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at A2 milk shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 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. Jytdog ( talk) 02:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While well-sourced, objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Jytdog ( talk) 02:33, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Hey, you are new here.
On talk pages, we thread comments, like this:
"outdent" because I sick of typing colons.
This is kind of etiquette here. It is described in the talk page guidelines. - See WP:TPG.
Please do this. Thanks. Jytdog ( talk) 05:11, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Tony.wallace.nz.
Along with my editing here, which is mostly about health, I work on conflict of interest and advocacy issues in Wikipedia.
I'd like to make sure you are aware of what we are all about here. First and foremost, there are a lot of things that Wikipedia is not. Due to its open nature as "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", a lot of people come to Wikipedia with a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is, and what it isn't. One of our most important policies, is What Wikipedia is not.
One of the things it isn't, is a platform for advocacy or advertising (these are the same thing, from the community's perspective - content written to promote or denigrate something, that violates key content policies and guidelines as well).
This is discussed in the WP:SOAPBOX section of NOT.
We do understand that sometimes people are passionate about something in the real world, and want to come to Wikipedia to contribute to articles about that. This passion is a double-edged sword -- it drives contributions, but it can also lead people to be in too much of a hurry, and too intense, to learn how Wikipedia works and how to edit and behave according to the policies and guidelines that the community has built to govern itself. People who are passionate also have a hard time listening, and working through differences calmly, based on the policies and guidelines.
This is discussed somewhat in the policy section, WP:YESPOV. We also have two very good essays offering advice - one is WP:ADVOCACY and the other is WP:SPA (the latter stands for "single purpose account"). Please do read them both.
It takes time to really be what we call WP:HERE (as in "here to build an encyclopedia"). Only you can decide if you will be here, or not here.
If you do want to be here, and become part of the community and help with our work, you are very welcome and there are lots of people who will be willing to help you. But please do be aware that you agree to learn and follow the policies and guidelines every time you edit here - that agreement is in Terms of Use that is linked-to, at the bottom of every page, and a link to the Terms of Use is also directly over the "save" button in the editing window. That is the basis on which we restrict the privileges of people who are NOTHERE.
So really - it is your choice! Please slow down and learn, and please stop trying to use Wikipedia as a SOAPBOX for A2 milk. If you continue as you have been, you will end up very frustrated and frustrating a lot of people in the process.
So... good luck! I will be happy to answer any questions you have. You can reply here if you like - I am watching your page now. Jytdog ( talk) 19:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
You are obligated to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Really! It takes time to learn them but you have to try. This kind of Talk page comment does not help move the conversation forward and is actually harmful to you.
I get it that in your experience A2 milk has very different effects from normal milk for your partner as you noted here, but you must check that stuff at the log in page, and base what you do here on what reliable sources say, and the policies and guidelines.
Having a point of view is not bad and is human, but per the policy WP:YESPOV all of us have to do our best to leave that behind here. Jytdog ( talk) 22:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Tony.wallace.nz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Hi there Tony, I thought I'd draw to your attention that Wikipedia is supposed to be built on verifiable facts. That is achieved by providing references. That's the theory, at least. In practice, there's lots of unverified material in all sorts of articles. Another fact, though, is that adding unreferenced material to articles of controversial nature runs a risk of that material being removed by another editor simply on the fact that it lacks references. Hence, I suggest that you review Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, as it's rather frustrating to see one's work disappear again. Schwede 66 03:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Tea Tape scandal, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. — Andrew s talk 04:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at A2 milk shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 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. Jytdog ( talk) 02:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While well-sourced, objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Jytdog ( talk) 02:33, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Hey, you are new here.
On talk pages, we thread comments, like this:
"outdent" because I sick of typing colons.
This is kind of etiquette here. It is described in the talk page guidelines. - See WP:TPG.
Please do this. Thanks. Jytdog ( talk) 05:11, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Tony.wallace.nz.
Along with my editing here, which is mostly about health, I work on conflict of interest and advocacy issues in Wikipedia.
I'd like to make sure you are aware of what we are all about here. First and foremost, there are a lot of things that Wikipedia is not. Due to its open nature as "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", a lot of people come to Wikipedia with a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is, and what it isn't. One of our most important policies, is What Wikipedia is not.
One of the things it isn't, is a platform for advocacy or advertising (these are the same thing, from the community's perspective - content written to promote or denigrate something, that violates key content policies and guidelines as well).
This is discussed in the WP:SOAPBOX section of NOT.
We do understand that sometimes people are passionate about something in the real world, and want to come to Wikipedia to contribute to articles about that. This passion is a double-edged sword -- it drives contributions, but it can also lead people to be in too much of a hurry, and too intense, to learn how Wikipedia works and how to edit and behave according to the policies and guidelines that the community has built to govern itself. People who are passionate also have a hard time listening, and working through differences calmly, based on the policies and guidelines.
This is discussed somewhat in the policy section, WP:YESPOV. We also have two very good essays offering advice - one is WP:ADVOCACY and the other is WP:SPA (the latter stands for "single purpose account"). Please do read them both.
It takes time to really be what we call WP:HERE (as in "here to build an encyclopedia"). Only you can decide if you will be here, or not here.
If you do want to be here, and become part of the community and help with our work, you are very welcome and there are lots of people who will be willing to help you. But please do be aware that you agree to learn and follow the policies and guidelines every time you edit here - that agreement is in Terms of Use that is linked-to, at the bottom of every page, and a link to the Terms of Use is also directly over the "save" button in the editing window. That is the basis on which we restrict the privileges of people who are NOTHERE.
So really - it is your choice! Please slow down and learn, and please stop trying to use Wikipedia as a SOAPBOX for A2 milk. If you continue as you have been, you will end up very frustrated and frustrating a lot of people in the process.
So... good luck! I will be happy to answer any questions you have. You can reply here if you like - I am watching your page now. Jytdog ( talk) 19:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
You are obligated to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Really! It takes time to learn them but you have to try. This kind of Talk page comment does not help move the conversation forward and is actually harmful to you.
I get it that in your experience A2 milk has very different effects from normal milk for your partner as you noted here, but you must check that stuff at the log in page, and base what you do here on what reliable sources say, and the policies and guidelines.
Having a point of view is not bad and is human, but per the policy WP:YESPOV all of us have to do our best to leave that behind here. Jytdog ( talk) 22:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)