NORMAN PRINCE
NORMAN PRINCE, you are invited to the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hi NORMAN PRINCE! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC) |
Nomination of Trump-Mexico Deal for deletion
edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trump-Mexico Deal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump-Mexico Deal until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi.!
The Article Trump-Mexico Deal, I just published on Wikipedia, is nominated for deletion. Trump "deal" with Mexico and Mexicans, started since the Trump (the person) announced he was running for President. Until is solved, the subject is an important matter. Is an important thing since this relation, and what happens, will decide the future of millions. Wikipedia does not have this subject. It will need much contribution since things will happen until it is settle in to what way they will go. Everything in the Article, is a compilation of what has being said by experts, the exact words said by experts was used and can be confirmed by reading in the links. That is wht they are many. The links are official, or credited, What you decide is fine, if it is to delete it, or if welcome and we keep contributing to make it better. HAPPY 2017 Thank you NORMAN PRINCE (talk) 06:50, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions alert
edit
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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 that 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.Stop lying about other users and start paying attention.
editYou keep claiming, despite being contradicted, that "The person that marked for deletion offer me to help, [...] that person insulted me, etc. I just let it go, a few months latter he published it" -- looking over the page histories for the article, your talk page, and Robert McClenon's, that claim is completely false.
I've said a few times already that that claim contradicts public records. Quit lying about other users and start paying attention to what they say. As has been explained repeatedly:
- Wikipedia requires neutrality: your wording (e.g. "great negotiator," "wise investor) is not neutral.
- Wikipedia is not the place to promote your views on hypothetical deals between Trump and Mexico. We are not a blog, we are not a soapbox, we are not here for advocacy.
- Wikipedia does not deal with speculation: two "possible outcomes" is two too many.
If you keep lying about other users (all user actions are automatically recorded and are public record) and ignoring everyone's advice, you will eventually be dragged in front of the administrator's noticeboard to be topic banned from editing politics or perhaps even blocked for tendentious behavior. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:11, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
I have keep always keep communication level as it think, Wikipedia is to be. I dont understand why you refer to me and communicate in that way, I mentioned an example of a previous Article experience. I have not accused no one in this subject. If you guys dont want me or my contribution fine. I do not lie, I just made an Article, and try to contribute to Wikipedia, that is not welcome. You guys are the experts. This is my point of view, I try to contribute with an article, my apology. If my work is different, in any way with Wikipedia I understand, but why be hostile to me? I just wanted to contribute, you tell me I dont lessen, why? what am I to do to keep peace? I just wanted to be helpful and contribute to Wikipedia. Thank you, NORMAN PRINCE (talk) 18:48, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Why would a previous article's experience be relevant? And the only article you've tried to create under this account is the Trump-Mexico Deal. What was the name of the previous account you used to create an article, what was the article, and who was the user who insulted you? Ian.thomson (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
- User:NORMAN PRINCE - It is usually helpful in Wikipedia to compose your posts in good syntactic English. Your comments here, and at the Teahouse, and at the AFD, are not in good English (although I am assuming that English is your first language). Before composing a post in such anger that it doesn't parse, I suggest that you think and compose your thoughts before composing your words. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)