User talk:KokkaShinto

Welcome![edit]

Hello, KokkaShinto! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, 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 using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Gimme danger (talk) 14:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Please note that it is against Wikipedia style guidelines to wikilink years when not in a full date and the linking of full dates is controversial. If you would like to help out in a similar manner, perhaps you could try correcting typos with the Typo Team. Cheers, Gimme danger (talk) 14:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I echo the above concern; please stop indiscriminately linking dates and years. Maralia (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further, please be aware that a current injunction by the Arbitration Committee explicitly forbids mass linking dates at this time. Please stop. Maralia (talk) 14:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maralia you should not be revert warring over the linking or delinking of dates either, despite the injunction. Both of you could be blocked for a violation if you continue. —Locke Cole • t • c 15:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made precisely two edits, one to each of two articles on my watchlist, to remove inappropriately added date linking. Please do show evidence of my 'revert warring', or retract the accusation. Maralia (talk) 15:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will retract it if you stop reverting, otherwise you're as guilty of violating the injunction as the party you accuse. Please see WP:BITE, BTW. —Locke Cole • t • c 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have completely missed the facts here. I made a single reversion at two articles a full hour before your "if you stop reverting" comment here; I have not made more than one revert to any article, nor have I reverted any other of the 40 edits made by this editor or any other date linking edits by any editor today. Pray tell, in what universe could this be construed as edit warring or violating the injunction?

As to your ludicrous referral to BITE, I saw a new editor repeatedly do something expressly forbidden by the injunction, and politely advised him of it and asked him to stop; this is not biting. You, however, saw an established editor make a single revert at two different articles and jumped to explicit accusations of revert warring and threatening blocks. I think it's pretty clear who is out of line here. Maralia (talk) 15:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw two articles I had watchlisted both reverted by you, and I noted this editors other edits seemed to all be reverted as well and I assumed (incorrectly) you had been reverting all of them. I see now another editor, Qqqqqq (talk · contribs), was the one performing the mass reverts. I apologize for not realizing this sooner. I still think the way this has been handled (the rollbacks in general and so forth) is a textbook example of biting the newbies. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's an apology? How about "I apologize for accusing you of revert warring"? Or "I apologize for threatening you with a block"? Or "I apologize for using incredibly heavy-handed language like 'otherwise you're as guilty of violating the injunction as the party you accuse'"? I am not some fragile flower that can't handle forthright language, but when one errs, the ethical approach is to offer an apology in proportion to the blunder.

This is not an example of BITE, except insofar as the unfounded accusations against me plastered all over here may intimidate a new editor. An editor made edits in contradiction of current policy; the editor was advised of general policy and helpfully directed to a process that might be of interest, then advised of the specific relevant policy and asked to 'please stop'. No biting there. Maralia (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-constructive edits[edit]

Hi. I would like to inform you that edits like this one, that replace Images with File are considered non-constructive. Please don't make changes with single purpose to change Image with File. You are triggering thousands of Whatchlists by making trivial edits that don't improve the article. Moreover, you are making edits that fast that you are making errors (check the example I am providing in detail). Additionally, please mark as minor all edits that are minor and consider providing an edit summary for your actions. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 08:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies[edit]

Warning unwarranted and improper conduct on my part, my apologies. Soxwon (talk) 02:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]