AK76

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page to follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons' policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring and sockpuppetry.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, doing so will result your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 11:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Per WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (WP:BRD), please discuss your point of view about the "inherent likeness of the SAR-21 with the STEYR AUG" on Talk:SAR 21 with the other regular editors, I promise I'll stand aside and watch while you present your case. So what say you?

Note also that you have violated WP:3RR without adhering first to my suggestion of WP:BRD (as I've stated clearly in my edit summary to you) to discuss your point of view, this alone could get you BLOCKED for persistent disruptive edits in reverting. FWIW, I'm willing to let it all go if only you would listen to my advice now and go there to discuss. Take heed, best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 11:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

  You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on SAR 21. 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. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I hate to do this but you left me no choice. Please discuss about this content dispute on the discussion page of the aforementioned article (per WP:BRD) or be prepare to face the consequences. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 11:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

i did not see the reference to the SAR-21 talk page and i would have liked to go there beforehand - as i obviously do not regularly contribute to wiki the reference could have been clearer. I would have asked you directly however your talk page is locked and i was simply confronted with multiple undos. so yes, the discussion goes there until i (an Austrian ex-servicemen) can convince you (a Singaporean ex-servicemen) that your country's primary rifle is based upon my country's primary rifle...don't think this debate, or our exchange till date, does much for Wiki cred. AK76 (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

• FYI, I gather that you are new here and I have not done anything in anyway to bite you, so what made you say such thing in your edit summary? This is no different from you making a personal attack on me and is, quite possible if I take you to task, a WP:AGF violation which is a blockable offence. Take heed because the next time you do this again, an Admin will be the one giving you an earful and possibly a BLOCK for you. Best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 00:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Technically, I would like to remind you that you have broken almost all the rules and guidelines governing the editing of Wikipedia when you started off your "Wiki career" on the article page of SAR 21. Also, I don't want to be seen as bearing down on you constantly carrying a big stick when I have been, in fact, refraining from overreacting to your accusations of me being carrying out "nationalistic propaganda". It is quite rude by any standard to be doing name callings of other editors when in fact, a simple question by you to clear up the mess could have been seen as a polite gesture to resolve a content dispute regarding the article's subject likeness to that of another article's subject. Hence, I'm leaving you a civility passage for you to better acquaint yourself with Wikipedia. Please, click and learn. Best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 01:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

dave:

1. I asked on the edit page twice why you had undone my edits. You did not comment at all. Please do not say a simple question would have sufficed when I asked that question a number of times.
2. I would have contacted you but your talk page is locked. I especially signed up to wiki only to be able to send you a private message or at least edit on your talk page, both which have been made impossible.
3. you finally deigned to respond to me by simply saying that i am vandalizing a page, and that the sar-21 is related to the tar-21 instead of the steyr. i find that intellectually dishonest, to say the least, as i presume you have at least looked at the wiki pages of both weapons if indeed you are not acquainted with them. Also, on SAR-21 talk page the same opinion has been voiced before by other editors. Did you not accept those opinions either?
4. i do understand that accusations of nationalism are serious, and will retract that as I do not want to accuse you of really engaging (at least consciously or deliberately) in real nationalist propaganda. I do not know your motives for what I do consider quite rude and high-handed behavior but I accept that nationalist propaganda is a serious charge I should not have made.
5. I do consider myself "bitten" - thank you for the link btw - and I am very discouraged with wiki as a whole by this experience. I would have been happy to take the discussion to the Sar-21 talk page at the beginning but did not even know it existed (yes stupid me). As you are quite happy to point out behavior etiquette ad nausem, given that you are impossible to contact this piece of advice would have been truly helpful a little earlier on. Continuous warnings that you will block me are less helpful, especially as you never decided to tell me what was wrong with my edits. By the way, you still have not done so.
6. Finally, yes I should have gone to the SAR-21 talk page from the start but I simply forgot or didn't realize it was an option. A simple note ("go to talk page") would have worked wonders, perhaps.

AK76 (talk) 11:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply