User talk:Jack7188

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Sholom Rubashkin. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sholom Rubashkin

Please address the issues regarding the reliability of sources on the article talk page. Once your edit has been reverted you must use the talk page. Sean.hoyland - talk 05:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I posted in your talk page, these are facts. Plain facts. There are 45 congressmen who have written to the AG. See them here: http://justiceforsholom.org/the-response/congressional-response. You can read every single one of them.

Go here to hear the congressional hearing with your own ears:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/JusticeDepartmentOve

For Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz skip to 24:10

and then for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee skip to 1:40:02

Jack7188

Jack7188 (talk) 05:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia's policy regarding verifiability. All information must by verifiable using reliable sources. justiceforsholom.org is not a reliable source. Please don't use it. Yated Ne’eman may or may not be a reliable source but if you want to use it you must either establish that it is reliable for the information by posting a question at the reliable sources noticeboard or find a better source, a mainstream newspaper for example. Also, please make your case and get WP:CONSENSUS for your edits at the article's talk page, not here and not on my talk page. You are not allowed to keep restoring material when it has been reverted, do you understand ? That is edit warring and it is not allowed. You have to make policy based arguments for it at the article talk page. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sholom Rubashkin. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:49, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks. --Jack7188 (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]