User talk:Knepflerle

You have suddenly begun deleting content. Some of the changes look reasonable, but you are also removing wikilinks from lists of terms and deleting content because of a lack of references. We have many, many bits of information that do not have specific references, so a user who decides to delete content for the reason that a page does not name a source is a danger to our site. Please consider reading WT:CFI and visiting the WT:BP and its old discussions to see examples of good reasons to remove or alter content. Also, WT:RFV and WT:TR are good places to bring issues. --EncycloPetey 21:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Upon looking more closely at the contributions by 24.111.234.4, I can't help the impression that the majority of them mixes or confuses homophony and etymology. While I'm generally not a friend of general warning boxes like unreferenced (because they tend to stick on pages because nobody actually refutes and removes the questioned crap) this is a clear case where to use them. -- Gauss 22:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:Block

Thank you for the e-mail. It does explain some of the witnessed behavior. However, you seem to be assuming that policies here are the same as those on Wikipedia. They are not, and this often confuses new users here. I refer you to WT:AGF, which you will notice is very different from its counterpart policy on Wikipedia. The block given to you might have been harsh by Wikipedia standards, but not by Wiktionary's. Deletion of content with no rationale other than "unreferenced" is severely frowned upon. The block was intended to protect our site and to give you the time necessary to review site policies. For this, a block of one day is neither excessive nor unwarranted, and it should be ending within a few hours. --EncycloPetey 17:51, 24 July 2008 (UTC)