User talk:Rachman227/archive

Issues

As this is an online encyclopedia, we do not remove things we dont like WP:IDONTLIKEIT - specially where an item is already referenced.

Please take care and understand what WP:ABOUT means, it does not mean sanitising articles. JarrahTree 09:09, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also when you re-arrange text and move things around, please indicate why in your edit summaries, otherwise your edits are likely to be reverted as another editor does not know why you are doing some of your edits. JarrahTree 09:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Too many images

I learn that you share the thought with User:Dwi Chania on insisting to add too many pictures. Your recent edits in the article Indonesia and Jakarta has included too many images. Despite I'm appreciating your contributions, I think those images has overwhelmed the article and just too much. The images should help the reader to understand the subjects better, instead of cluttering the page. Image should not sandwiching the article/body text. Wikipedia article is not an image gallery. Please learn more on Wikipedia:Manual of Style especially the section MoS:IMAGES. Thank you. Gunkarta talk 16:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Images make Wikipedia more informative, accessible, and professional.

In general, when working with images:

DO:
Review the image style guide and use policy.
Give context with captions and alt text.
Try to find at least one image for each article.
Look for free images.
Clean up images: crop, color-correct, etc.
Create and upload your own images.
Use the best file format for each image.
Use objects for scale where helpful.

DON’T:
Don't upload non-free images.
Don't use images in place of tables or charts.
Don't use images or galleries excessively.
Don't add images that are not relevant.
Don't flip faces, text, or works of art.
Don't set fixed image sizes.
Don't sandwich text between two images.
Don't refer to images by their placement.

--Moxy (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warning

Editors who engage in edit warring are liable to be blocked from editing to prevent further disruption. While any edit warring may lead to sanctions, there is a bright-line rule called the three-revert rule (3RR), the violation of which often leads to a block.

The three-revert rule states:

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Fourth reverts just outside the 24-hour period may also be taken as evidence of edit-warring, especially if repeated or combined with other edit-warring behavior.

--Moxy (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please just read our guidelines =

No need to get blocked because your not aware of some basics. please review MOS:SANDWICH and WP:EDITWAR -- Moxy (talk) 00:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edits to the Indonesia article

In particular, this edit and its edit summary:

Who editors are does not matter (mostly). What matters is they use the sites policies and guidelines to edit cooperatively. Thus, it does not matter if Moxy is Indonesian or not, nor does it matter if you are Indonesian. People from nations do not own the articles about their nations, because implementing such a policy would only lead to racism.
As more than one editor has explained for you, putting too many images is image spam, and not allowed per WP:MOSIMAGES.
Moxy has a good-faith reason for undoing your edits and is not disrupting the site. Therefore, Moxy removing the images is not in vandalism.
Per WP:BRD, you need to discuss the matter at Talk:Indonesia. Someone has already started a discussion at Talk:Indonesia#Too_many_images. Comment on content, not on contributors, remember that other people probably have good reasons for doing what they do, and speak from reason instead of emotion. If you add the images one more time, you will be blocked for edit warring:

Your recent editing history at Indonesia 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 article's 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. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:50, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please becareful on uploading and using images

I see some of the pictures you probably had uploaded has been erased from wikipedia commons. Such as File:Sekolah Jakarta.jpg etc. I would like to inform you that copyvio (copyright issues) is important issue in image uploading and providing for wikipedia article. One should not copy and paste images taken from the net, if do so it is a copyright infringement. If you want to upload images for wikimedia commons, it has to be your own work, a photo taken by you. You can take photos of objects of interest in your city, and upload it to wikimedia commons. Thank you. Oh yeah, one more thing, it is not a polite practice to erase messages from other editors that has been sent to you. The best reaction is to respond to it kindly. If you want to ignore it, it's your right. Your talkpage is also your right. But I have to tell you some of ethics and basic practice here on interacting with fellow wikipedia editors/contributors. Thanks. Gunkarta talk 20:22, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo usage

Please be very aware of what WP:ABOUT and WP:NOT actually means. In English. What an online encyclopedia is about. Specially as it might be more suitable to be an editor on WP id - you might feel more comfortable here. As for rights as explained by Gunkarta above, not as simple. There are many messages that must be taken notice of.

As for what constitutes good behaviour on wp en, best to go through introductory material, rather than experiementing and finding out the hard way - some of which, if taken to the logical extension can lead to sanctions and blocking.

Also asserting your view of the world at Malay race is not what wikipedia is about. To revert someone else's edits (specially an administrator) is showing how little you understand what wikipedia ia about, to put vandalism against an admins revert suggests you know very little about why and what editing is about.

On wikipedia we reach consensus by going to talk pages first, to ascertain why an edit was done, then, try to reach agreement.

Also at Malay race, you are close to being blocked due to WP:3RR, in which case you gain a bad mark, and become less likely to be considered a member of the community who understands how things work. Go slower, more careful and watch, hati hati, otherwise we will be saying selamat jalan... JarrahTree 00:40, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not erase the messages in your talkpage

Please learn Wikipedia:Etiquette. Your actions that remove/erased some messages/information/warning given by fellow editors might demonstrate poor ethics and misconducts on interacting within wikipedia community. By erasing friendly warnings and suggestions, implying that you're not taking a note, not taking our warning seriously, or even ignoring us. It makes us harder to address you some specific issues (example: "Too many images"), you might run into the same problem again in the future and (might) act as if you still new in this problem, since you have erased the earlier warnings. You might archieving the talk page if it is getting too long, but please take a note by not erasing messages from other editors.

I understand that you are new here, but you seems not to bother on reading the useful introduction links provided by JarrahTree and tends to having messy start by just hit the road and drive carelessly, and learn it the hard way by get into some problems with other editors. Be careful, this might led you to be blocked from editing.

Plus reupload images by (this time) credited the source of image/information is clearly not enough. It is still counts as copyvio (copyright infringements) as you taken it without consent of the author, since I learned you took it from sites/blogs in the internet. The most valid image to be upload into wikimedia commons is entirely your image (taken by you with your own camera, not by browsing the net). Remember, stubborness is not helping, and I just trying to keep the articles in its best shape (prior of images overload) and also trying to help you to be a good contributor. Gunkarta talk 05:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gunkarta, I'm not adding many photos. By the way, I recommend you to read this: Wikipedia:You Can't Follow All The Rules, All The Time. And thanks for your notices and to trying to make me a good contributor. Rachman227 (talk) 12:34, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you did added some pictures with questionable copyright status. Remember the sekolah Jakarta file? you push it to be put on some articles. Then when an administrator in Wikimedia commons deleted it, the images and caption in Wikipedia articles are gone erased by bot. You practically disrupted the article completeness by doing so. As a newbie I suggest you to be humble and learn the rules first. By suggesting Wikipedia:You Can't Follow All The Rules, All The Time you seems to talk back and refuse to be helped. You miss "all the time" part, which means you should follow the rules not everytime but "most of the times", and you should not ignore the rules "all the time". Gunkarta talk 12:46, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

constantly reverting others talk messages

In view of you being a new user, it would be well advised to leave the messages on your page and not constantly revert, in good faith WP:AGF.

Also. although some have written messages in Indonesian, it would be appreciated, as this is english wikipedia, for you to write in english please. JarrahTree 09:14, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also: -

08:25, 30 April 2016 (diff | hist) . . (+751)‎ . . Indonesia ‎ (1. Who are you may I ask? 2. I bet you're not even Indonesian 3. We Indonesians are not spamming. 4. If you just going to delete all images and people's work, you're vandalizing.)
08:17, 30 April 2016 (diff | hist) . . (+751)‎ . . Indonesia ‎ (NOT A SPAM, JUST MORE ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE IN INDONESIA!!!)

Such summaries are not very wise. (1) There is nothing about saying who can edit what on WP:ABOUT - there is nothing to distinguish whether someone can edit about anything, or not (2) your understanding of vandalism is not what general principals of editing make (3) Please read very carefully what people say before reacting. Better to delay and think about it rather than recting. Also WP:SHOUTING is always unwise, Capitals are not useful. JarrahTree 09:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:JarrahTree to let me know, I appreciate your concerns. Rachman227 (talk) 11:56, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you must understand this is an online Encyclopedia, not a blog or a web page where you can project ideas that you like or prefer. The scope of an online encyclopedia is not for WP:SOAPBOX or similar. It is for WP:Notable topics that can be supported by WP:RS. Very important to keep that in perspective. JarrahTree 13:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are close to being blocked

Read WP:EDITWARRING JarrahTree 00:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

You have been told several times to stop edit warring. If you do not stop, you are liable to be blocked. You clearly are not reading anybody's rationale for removing images, nor are you attempting to discuss your position as recommended by WP:BRD. You have instead been continuously adding an extraneous amount of images and, when reverted by persons familiar with both the subject matter and/or Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you have simply reverted with nationalistic claims of ownership ("Yes, all due respect, Indonesia and Jakarta wikipedia pages are ours (Indonesia), for all people. Not yours" and "1. Who are you may I ask? 2. I bet you're not even Indonesian 3. We Indonesians are not spamming. 4. If you just going to delete all images and people's work, you're vandalizing"), or by claiming that you are fixing articles or reverting vandalism. When you have been pulled into a discussion, you have shown no interest in learning why you've been reverted so much, and indeed you've simply reverted warnings without nary a response. You need to talk to others, to try and build a consensus. Simply reverting and edit warring will get you blocked. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring noticeboard notification

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:18, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Crisco 1492, thanks for reporting me. Yes I'm new to Wikipedia and you are so much longer staying here, but I'm just trying to be a good contributor in Wikipedia. If you don't like me, don't threat me like a 10 years old child. Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks, Wikipedia:WikiBullying, Wikipedia:Harassment, Wikipedia:Don't be obnoxious. Your talk contributions have been added to my Archive page, User_talk:Rachman227/archive, because I just learned how to do so. See Personal talk page cleanup; moved to talk/archive. I'm not deleting your comments, since everything in Wikipedia is archived cannot be deleted. And remember Crisco, if Wikipedia really are your life, then okay, but I have other things to be cared about other than Wikipedia. I don't have time for your hatred towards me for no reason. PS. Crisco, people like you keeps editors/contributors away from Wikipedia. Rachman227 (talk) 02:34, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note, when you revert without good explanation, you are warned of edit warring. That is NOT treating you like a 10 year old child, that is asking you to understand wikipedia standards and expected behaviours and rules, as an adult.

Collecing a range of irrelevent tags (they have no relevance to edit warring) and throwing them at an adminsistrator and experienced user is very bad faith, and as a new user you should have WP:AGF. To simply point out what is accepted is not hatred, simply trying to show you the way things work.

Wikipedia is not anyones life, we all have our lives outside of this online community, and we are all part of a very large collection of collaborative editors, where we work towards clear consensus and community where many different styles and cultural issues can be accomodated when a reasonable fair minded approach is taken. JarrahTree 05:32, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing at Indonesia and other articles

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The full report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Rachman227 reported by User:Crisco 1492 (Result: Blocked). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 05:03, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got it?

OK, it would appear you have a better understanding of what WP:ABOUT and WP:NOT might be, please also understand that WP:OWN is something you need to understand very very clearly. There are many current editors who think if they chip away at something that they think they know or perceive as being what wikipedia needs, they can get away with it. Not true. We have established standards, and it is an online encyclopedia first. Please listen to and understand fellow editors, it helps all of us if we can understandthe principles. thanks. JarrahTree 00:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]