User talk:Guinsberg

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

Tips and pointers

Hi. I'm not saying you're wrong about anything. But be aware that the purpose of public editing is to improve wikipedia. Blanking content that is unsourced and editorialized is always understandable. However, when it comes to blanking sourced content, prudence and modesty should be exercised. For example, rather than taking unilateral action, you could start a discussion on the discussion page and seek to build a consensus. Or better yet, you could bring the issue to the attention of Wikiproject Latin America and engage other users to help research the items in question and constructively improve the article. Again, I know from my own experience that seeing something you disagree with can be tempting to change, but realize it is sourced content and before academia is dismissed, it should be investigated thoroughly and agreed upon. Regards Yongbyong38 (talk) 01:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

SIPRI Military Expenditure Database update

Thank you for updating the entries in the article. I know there are a lot of countries on the list. Keep up the good work. Nirvana888 (talk) 03:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

An RfCU

An RfC/U about AlexCovarrubias (talk · contribs) has been filed - I know you have expressed concerns about his conduct at a previous time and encourage you to participate.·Maunus·ƛ· 15:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Second warning

Please do not remove sourced information without good reason. If you want to make a change like that you should clarify your comments on the talk page. As it is now, it looks like you made an overly broad statement on the talk page but disregarded why information was against one of the pillars and policy and instead just removed info when it already met verification standards. You might be on the right track but it was done so poorly I cannot help but question your edits.Cptnono (talk) 07:23, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Since Cptnono successfully manoeuvred and campaigned for me to get an indefinite ban on editing Israel/Palestine articles (yes I must take the blame for falling into his trap), I have followed his career with interest. He is essentially a pro-Israeli POV warrior. He dose make some effort to hide this fact eg he will pretend to sympathise with other view points, but invariably he acts to suppress information or viewpoints which are critical of Israel (usually citing dubious technical reasons). Be aware –he is manipulative, and extremely adept at playing the system. All the best Prunesqualer (talk) 15:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)