Subscribe in a reader

Pages vues depuis décembre 2009

mercredi 9 juillet 2014

Twin Paradox on Wikipedia : DVdm, an anonymous relativist fascist threatens me when I try to write the REAL DATA of Langevin's text

by Yanick Toutain

"You may be blocked from editing
 without further warning
 the next time
you make
 personal attacks on other people,
 as you did at
 Talk:Twin paradox.

Comment on content,
not on fellow editors. -
 DVdm (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)"
Anonymous DVdm THREATENS ME !
After deletion of the real numbers
of Paul Langevin


DVdm is policeman, investigator, procurator, judge.... He is "all" on Wikipedia !
He is the owner of the page "TWIN PARADOX"
He can do whatever he wants !
He is the keeper of .... the lies !
He erases all the true quotations from the original text !
With his ally pseudo-Paradoctor, he erases the true numbers !

MERCREDI 9 JUILLET 2014

The 1st fascist relativistic clears my paragraph with real numerical data from the original text. 2 ° fascist threat relativistic me and just delete my comments (for explanation and protest their fascist censorship!).........

MARDI 8 JUILLET 2014

Twin Paradox on Wikipedia: I just write the real data of Paul Langevin in their "specific example" (Bologna 1911 The relativistic swindlers hardly ever give the real numbers)

Paul Langevin, a swindler !
Prophet of Einstein's
Church relativity
by Yanick Toutain
(...) "This remark provides the means
for any among us who wants to devote
two years of his life,
to find out what the Earth will be
 in two hundred years
,
and to explore the future of the Earth,
by making in his life a jump ahead
 that will last two centuries
 for Earth and for him
 it will last two years,
(Real data of Langevin's text
Bologna 1911)

22h32
First fascist Paradoctor erase my text on Wikipedia

"don't see what this adds, if you want to reorganize the article, please state on the talk page how this would improve the article. (TW))"
When I give the REAL DATA... the anonymous relativist fascist Paradoctor "don't see what this adds" AND HE DESTROYS my text with the real data of Paul Langevin 
I just introduce the real data of Paul Langevin in an "specific example" of Wikipedia. One of countless examples with false data that were not in the original text.
I have not cleared their imaginary data but I just copy/paste their same paragraph below by inserting the actual data from the text of 1911.
The reader will soon see why these fascists are constantly erasing me whenever I try to turn the spotlight on the real text.
The worst of these "Wikipedia censors"  erased the real citations of Paul Langevin accusing me of making "original work"
FASCISTS USE MY PERSONNAL PAGE AS THEIR OWN GARDEN
Relativist fascists threaten me

Original research[modifier]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Twin paradox, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable sourcefor all of your contributions. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 21:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Information icon Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Twin paradox. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 22:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Note regarding this section title Quotation of true text of Langevin is destroyed by fascists and called "original research": please do not resort to personal attacts here on Wikipedia—see wp:NPA. - DVdm (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

March 2014[modifier]

Information icon Hello, I'm DVdm. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Talk:Twin paradox, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DVdm (talk) 18:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Information icon Please stop using talk pages such as Twin paradox for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Paradoctor (talk) 19:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Building consensus[modifier]

If another editor reverts an edit of yours, and asks you to discuss it, don't revert back, that is considered edit warring. You might want to read WP:EDITCONSENSUS, that is how the process works. If you have questions, please feel free to ask. Paradoctor (talk) 21:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Stop icon
Your recent editing history at Twin paradox shows that you are currently engaged in an edit warBeing involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate thethree-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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. 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. - DVdm (talk) 15:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Twin paradox. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. - DVdm (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire