User talk:Stan Prager

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Stan Prager, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it 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. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are also conflict of interest issues with referencing your own writing in a Wikipedia article. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017[edit]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Stan Prager. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please also read our guidelines about using self-published blogs as sources here [1]. Referring to the removal of such content as 'malicious', especially when Wikipedia guidelines have been clearly explained, won't work well in a new editor's favor. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Charles Freeman (historian) 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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:00, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dianna: note that I have no axe to grind or wish to war with anyone. However, the reality is that there is an individual who is unstable and has been banned from multiple websites who has reappeared here under various pseudonyms in an attempt to discredit Charles Freeman. This person should be blocked. You do not need to include any material from me but you should take the due diligence to prevent his spurious academic criticism from being posted on this page. I have zero relationship with Charles Freeman, but I can tell you that he attacker -- who I banned from my own blog -- is obsessed with discrediting Freeman and is hardly qualified to use Wikipedia to effect his bizarre quest. -- Stan Prager Stan Prager (talk) 00:18, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attack the other editor again and you'll find yourself blocked. Work out your differences on the article's talk page without resorting to personal attacks. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:31, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page 31st Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry has been reverted.
Your edit here to 31st Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://31massinf.wordpress.com) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 16:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]