User talk:Sentinel R/Archive 2010
Page contents not supported in other languages.
Welcome!
Hello, Sentinel R, 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 {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! Doc Quintana (talk) 06:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sentinel R,
thank you for your article Nigerian sectarian violence. I ask you to write articles on Christian minorities in Muslim-majority states of Nigeria.
Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 17:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.
"Itself do the collage" Not what you would call a 'productive' edit summary. Wikipedia is a collaborative effot, not Sentinel R & co. encyclopedia. If you have a dispute, it's better to talk it out. Also, you don't seem to be a native English speaker. Is English your second or third language? Perhaps contributing to your region-based wikipedia would prove to be more fruitful. Akkies (talk) 06:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What happened to old picture set? That was way better than your new one. Only four people?--Korsentry 09:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanSentry (talk • contribs)
I have removed most of the text from talk:International recognition of Kosovo#Latin America because it was not relevant to the article, however I've left your original question and a couple of the responses that followed. I'm sorry Avala was so rude and unwelcoming to you - I think he must have got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. To be fair to Avala, your question was a bit unnecessary (because everything we know is already in the article) but there was no need for him to respond in the way that he did - I thought your question was quite normal. Having said that, you shouldn't have said his post was "like a drunken delirium" - bear in mind WP:CIVIL. Regards, Bazonka (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Belarusians. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Cool it. You're way past 3RR when you consider your IP address. You need to seek discussion now. Shadowjams (talk) 08:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
TFOWRThis flag once was red 13:13, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes some reference notes are in single columns and are difficult to follow - try it - you can actually find things easier in mutliple columns - please do not revert format items unless you can find a good example or policy to back it up - you might like to have a closer look at WP:MOS - please note as you have a low edit count - looking at what occurs in wikipedia is both looking at policy and practice - if you try reasoning on sense alone - you will find you are going to be having problems with acceptable usage in the general construction of pages - also as you have already been involved in edit war warnings - please note you will gain more respect in the community if you look first and look for good reason for things rather than revert things Because you dont like it SatuSuro 15:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sentinel R,
this is an article, which I have just created. It has the problem of having a list of its members, which probably mostly have articles. There seem to have been name-changes however. I suggest you ask someone for help, as you are member of the Wiki Project Nigeria.
Kind regards,Sarcelles (talk) 18:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've just reverted your edits to this article as the material you added doesn't seem relevant to the rest of the article's claimed content - I've explained this at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myanmar-Bangladesh 1 week war. It appears that there's an article to be written about the maritime border dispute between the two countries, but this isn't it. Nick-D (talk) 10:14, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sentinel R,
your possibly favourite article is back. Kind regardsSarcelles (talk) 16:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for adding the infobox. Now I have written articles on Religion in the states of Nigeria, where the Sharia is valid, such as Religion in Kano State. Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 17:53, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion at the bottom, from mid-sentence on, was indeed inadvertent. Not at all vandalism, and thanks for fixing it. Apologies. The revisions above were intentional. Check MOS, for example, as to 60 vs. sixty. And check the meaning of targeted killing -- that is not what was meant. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]