Contents 1 Summary 2 Attempts to evade detection 3 Examples of disruptive editing 3.1 Failure or refusal to "get the point" 3.2 Point-illustrating 4 Distinguished from productive editing 5 Dealing with disruptive editors 5.1 Blocking and sanctions 6 April Fools' Day 7 See also 8 Further reading

Summary Wikipedia owes much of its success to its openness. That very openness, however, sometimes attracts people who seek to exploit the site as a platform for pushing a single point of view, original research, advocacy or self-promotion. While notable minority opinions are welcome when verifiable through reliable sources, and constructive editors occasionally make mistakes, sometimes a Wikipedia editor creates long-term problems by persistently editing a page or set of pages with information which is not verifiable through reliable sources or insisting on giving undue weight to a minority view. Collectively, disruptive editors harm Wikipedia by degrading its reliability as a reference source and by exhausting the patience of productive editors who may quit the project in frustration when a disruptive editor continues with impunity. It is essential to recognize patterns of disruptive editing. Our edit warring policy already acknowledges that one act, by itself, may not violate policy, but when part of a series of acts they constitute a pattern that does violate policy. Disruptive edits may not occur all in the course of one brief period without fruitless attempts to discuss with the user, (as when the user persists after 12 warnings to stop) and may not consist of the repetition of the same act. Nevertheless, a series of edits over time may form a pattern that seriously disrupts the project. Disruptive editors may seek to disguise their behavior as productive editing, yet distinctive traits separate them from productive editors. When discussion fails to resolve the problem and when an impartial consensus of editors from outside a disputed page agree (through requests for comment or similar means), further disruption is grounds for blocking, and may lead to more serious disciplinary action through the dispute resolution process. In extreme cases this could include a site ban, either through the Arbitration Committee or by a consensus. The three revert rule, if observed by disruptive editors, is not to be construed as a defense against action taken to enforce this policy against disruptive editors. As stated in that policy, "The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times". Likewise, editors should note that the three revert rule should not be broken even by editors attempting to revert disruptive edits. Disruptive editing is not vandalism and it is better for productive editors to follow the process suggested below than to break the 3RR.

Attempts to evade detection Shortcut WP:RUNAWAY Disruptive editors sometimes attempt to evade disciplinary action in several ways: Their edits occur over a long period of time, in which case no single edit may be clearly disruptive but the overall pattern is so. Their edits are largely confined to talk pages; such disruption may not directly harm an article, but it often prevents other editors from reaching consensus on how to improve it. Their comments may avoid breaches of civility by refraining from personal attacks but still interfering with civil and collaborative editing and discussion. Their edits are limited to a small number of pages that very few people watch. Conversely, their edits may be distributed over a wide range of articles to make it less likely that any given user watches a sufficient number of affected articles to notice the disruptions. Nonetheless, such disruptive editing violates Wikipedia policy and norms.

Examples of disruptive editing Shortcut WP:DISRUPTSIGNS See also: Wikipedia:Editing policy This guideline concerns gross, obvious and repeated violations of fundamental policies, not subtle questions about which reasonable people may disagree. A disruptive editor is an editor who exhibits tendencies such as the following: Is tendentious: continues editing an article or group of articles in pursuit of a certain point for an extended time despite opposition from other editors. Tendentious editing does not consist only of adding material; some tendentious editors engage in disruptive deletions as well. An example is repeated deletion of reliable sources posted by other editors. Cannot satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability; fails to cite sources, cites unencyclopedic sources, misrepresents reliable sources, or manufactures original research. Engages in "disruptive cite-tagging"; adds unjustified {{citation needed}} tags to an article when the content tagged is already sourced, uses such tags to suggest that properly sourced article content is questionable. Does not engage in consensus building: a. repeatedly disregards other editors' questions or requests for explanations concerning edits or objections to edits; b. repeatedly disregards other editors' explanations for their edits. Rejects or ignores community input: resists moderation and/or requests for comment, continuing to edit in pursuit of a certain point despite an opposing consensus from impartial editors. In addition, such editors might: Shortcuts WP:DAPE WP:CTDAPE Campaign to drive away productive contributors: act counter to policies and guidelines such as Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:No personal attacks, Wikipedia:Ownership of articles, engage in sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry, etc. on a low level that might not exhaust the general community's patience, but that operates toward an end of exhausting the patience of productive rule-abiding editors on certain articles. Failure or refusal to "get the point" "WP:Listen" redirects here. For the template to embed audio, see Template:Listen. I can't hear you. Shortcuts WP:LISTEN WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT WP:IDHT WP:ICANTHEARYOU WP:NOTGETTINGIT In some cases, editors have perpetuated disputes by sticking to an allegation or viewpoint long after the consensus of the community has decided that moving on to other topics would be more productive. Such behavior is disruptive to Wikipedia. Believing that you have a valid point does not confer upon you the right to act as though your point must be accepted by the community when you have been told that it is not accepted. The community's rejection of your idea is not proof that they have failed to hear you. Stop writing, listen, and consider what the other editors are telling you. Make a strong effort to see their side of the debate, and work on finding points of agreement. Do not confuse "hearing" with "agreeing with". Sometimes, even when editors act in good faith, their contributions may continue to be disruptive and time wasting, for example, by continuing to say they don't understand what the problem is. Although editors should be encouraged to be bold and just do things if they think they're right, sometimes a lack of competence can get in the way. If the community spends more time cleaning up editors' mistakes and educating them about policies and guidelines than it considers necessary, sanctions may have to be imposed. Point-illustrating Main page: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point When one becomes frustrated with the way a policy or guideline is being applied, it may be tempting to try to discredit the rule or interpretation thereof by, in one's view, applying it consistently. Sometimes, this is done simply to prove a point in a local dispute. In other cases, one might try to enforce a rule in a generally unpopular way, with the aim of getting it changed. Such tactics are highly disruptive to the project. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or related pages. Note that someone can legitimately make a point, without disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate it.

Distinguished from productive editing Editors often post minority views to articles. This fits within Wikipedia's mission so long as the contributions are verifiable, do not give undue weight, and where appropriate, comply with WP:FRINGE. The burden of evidence rests with the editor who initially provides the information or wishes the information to remain. From Wikipedia:Neutral point of view: Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint. Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views. Verifiable and noteworthy viewpoints include protoscience when this is published in reputable peer-reviewed journals. Editors may reasonably present active public disputes or controversies which are documented by reliable sources. For example, citing a viewpoint stated in a mainstream scholarly journal, textbook, or monograph is not per se disruptive editing. This exemption does not apply to settled disputes; for example, insertion of claims that the Sun revolves around the Earth would not be appropriate today, even though this issue was active controversy in the time of Galileo. Mentioning such disputes in the article may however be appropriate if the controversy itself was notable (such as in this example). Sometimes well-meaning editors may be misled by fringe publications or make honest mistakes when representing a citation. Such people may reasonably defend their positions for a short time, then concede the issue when they encounter better evidence or impartial feedback.

Dealing with disruptive editors Shortcut WP:DDE Following is a model for remedies, though these steps do not necessarily have to be done in this sequence. In some extreme circumstances a rapid report to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents may be the best first step; in others, a fast track to a community ban may be in order. But in general, most situations can benefit from a gradual escalation, with hope that each step may help resolve the problem, such that further steps are not needed: First unencyclopedic entry by what appears to be a disruptive editor. Assume good faith. Do not attack the author who you suspect is disruptive. However, revert uncited or unencyclopedic material. Use an edit summary which describes the problem in non-inflammatory terms. Stay very civil. Post to talk page asking for discussion and/or sources. Consult Do not bite the newcomers, and be aware that you may be dealing with someone who is new and confused, rather than a problem editor. If editor restores, or unreverts: If sourced information appears this time around, do nothing; if not, revert again if they haven't responded at the talkpage. Ensure that a clear explanation for the difference in opinion is posted by you at the article talkpage. Refer to this thread in your edit summary. If possible, suggest compromises at the talkpage. If the reverting continues, and they are inserting unsourced information: Revert, and request an administrator via Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (ANI). Provide diffs of the multiple reverts by the tendentious editor. Keep your post short (no more than 250–500 words), well-diffed (multiple diffs showing evidence), and focus on user conduct issues (the tendentious editor is not engaging in discussion / is inserting unsourced information / is ignoring talkpage consensus). Try to avoid going into detailed article content issues at ANI, as it may reduce the likelihood that an admin will understand the complaint. Note: To be most successful at ANI, your own history must be clean. At all times, stay civil, and avoid engaging in multiple reverts yourself. If the tendentious editor is using sources, but if the sources are poor or misinterpreted: Do not go to ANI yet. Review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. File a report at the Reliable Sources noticeboard, if appropriate. Continue attempts to engage the editor in dialogue. Refer to policies and guidelines as appropriate. If only two editors are involved, seek a Third Opinion. If more editors are involved, try a Request for comment. Suggest Mediation. If mediation is rejected, unsuccessful, and/or the problems continue: Notify the editor you find disruptive on their user talkpage. Include diffs of the problematic behavior. Use a section name and/or edit summary to clearly indicate that you view their behavior as disruptive, but avoid being unnecessarily provocative. Remember, you're still trying to de-escalate the situation. If other editors are involved, they should post their own comments too, to make it clear that the community disapproves of the tendentious behavior. Tendentious editor continues reverting. Use templates {{subst:uw-disruptive1}}, {{subst:uw-disruptive2}}, {{subst:uw-disruptive3}}, and {{subst:uw-disruptive4}}. Assuming that it's one editor against many at this point, continue reverting the tendentious editor. If s/he exceeds three reverts in a 24-hour period, file a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (but be careful you don't do excessive reverts yourself!). However, one tendentious editor cannot maintain problematic content in the face of multiple other editors reverting his/her edits. If the tendentious editor is not violating the three-revert rule (3RR), or there aren't enough editors involved to enforce Wikipedia policies: File another ANI report. Editor continues to ignore consensus of any decision reached at ANI Again request assistance at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for administrator intervention, point to consensus from earlier talk pages or noticeboards. An admin should issue a warning or temporary block as appropriate. If blocks fail to solve the problem, or you are still unable to obtain attention via ANI, and all other avenues have been tried: File a case for the Arbitration Committee to review. Base it strictly on user conduct, and not on article content. Blocking and sanctions Disruptive editing may result in warnings and then escalating blocks, typically starting with 24 hours. Accounts used primarily for disruption may be blocked indefinitely.

April Fools' Day See also: Wikipedia:Rules for Fools All edits on April Fools' Day must continue to adhere to all applicable Wikipedia policies and guidelines, including (but not limited to) edit warring, no personal attacks and the biographies of living persons policy. With the exception of the Main Page, all edits that are intended to be humorous should be kept out of the article namespace and be tagged with {{Humor}} (or equivalent template, such as the inline {{April fools}} or {{4-1}}) to avoid misleading users.

See also Wikipedia:Avoiding talk-page disruption

Further reading Wikipedia:Disruptive sanctions Wikipedia:Griefing Wikipedia:Just drop it Wikipedia:No editor is indispensable Wikipedia:Tag team Wikipedia:Talk Wikipedia:WikiBullying v t e Wikipedia key policies and guidelines Five pillars What Wikipedia is not Ignore all rules Content Verifiability No original research Neutral point of view What Wikipedia is not Biographies of living persons Image use Wikipedia is not a dictionary Article titles Notability Autobiography Citing sources Identifying reliable sources medicine Do not include copies of primary sources Plagiarism Don't create hoaxes Fringe theories Patent nonsense External links Conduct Civility Consensus Editing policy Harassment Vandalism Ignore all rules No personal attacks Ownership of content Edit warring Dispute resolution Sock puppetry No legal threats Child protection Paid-contribution disclosure Assume good faith Conflict of interest Disruptive editing Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point Etiquette Gaming the system Please do not bite the newcomers Courtesy vanishing Deletion Deletion policy Proposed deletion Criteria for speedy deletion Attack page Oversight Proposed deletion of BLP Proposed deletion (books) Revision deletion Enforcement Administrators Banning Blocking Page protection Editing Article size Be bold Disambiguation Hatnotes Set index articles Subpages User pages Talk page guidelines Signatures Broad-concept article Project namespace WikiProjects Style Manual of Style Contents Accessibility Understandability Dates and numbers Images Layout Lead section Linking Lists Classification Categories, lists, and navigation templates Categorization Template namespace WMF List of policies Friendly space policy Licensing and copyright Privacy policy Values FAQ List of all policies and guidelines List of policies List of guidelines Lists of attempts in creating fundamental principles Retrieved from "" Categories: Wikipedia behavioral guidelinesWikipedia dispute resolutionHidden categories: Wikipedia move-protected project pagesWikipedia semi-protected project pages

Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged inTalkContributionsCreate accountLog in Namespaces Project pageTalk Variants Views ReadView sourceView history More Search Navigation Main pageContentsFeatured contentCurrent eventsRandom articleDonate to WikipediaWikipedia store Interaction HelpAbout WikipediaCommunity portalRecent changesContact page Tools What links hereRelated changesUpload fileSpecial pagesPermanent linkPage informationWikidata item Print/export Create a bookDownload as PDFPrintable version Languages বাংলাΕλληνικάEspañolفارسیFrançaisGalego한국어हिन्दीBahasa IndonesiaBahasa MelayuNederlands日本語NorskPortuguêsРусскийසිංහලSimple EnglishکوردیSuomiTiếng Việt中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 10 February 2018, at 19:32. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Developers Cookie statement Mobile view (window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgPageParseReport":{"limitreport":{"cputime":"0.236","walltime":"0.332","ppvisitednodes":{"value":1324,"limit":1000000},"ppgeneratednodes":{"value":0,"limit":1500000},"postexpandincludesize":{"value":112793,"limit":2097152},"templateargumentsize":{"value":6157,"limit":2097152},"expansiondepth":{"value":13,"limit":40},"expensivefunctioncount":{"value":16,"limit":500},"entityaccesscount":{"value":0,"limit":400},"timingprofile":["100.00% 258.055 1 -total"," 19.69% 50.819 1 Template:Pp-semi"," 16.02% 41.341 1 Template:Subcat_guideline"," 14.45% 37.284 5 Template:Shortcut"," 14.17% 36.561 1 Template:Ombox"," 12.54% 32.365 8 Template:Navbox"," 9.14% 23.575 1 Template:Pp-move-indef"," 9.07% 23.409 3 Template:Sidebar"," 8.82% 22.764 1 Template:Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines"," 8.26% 21.310 1 Template:Guideline_list"]},"scribunto":{"limitreport-timeusage":{"value":"0.110","limit":"10.000"},"limitreport-memusage":{"value":3403431,"limit":52428800}},"cachereport":{"origin":"mw1265","timestamp":"20180218073037","ttl":1900800,"transientcontent":false}}});});(window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgBackendResponseTime":62,"wgHostname":"mw1275"});});

Wikipedia:Disruptive_editing - Photos and All Basic Informations

Wikipedia:Disruptive_editing More Links

This Page Is Semi-protected.Wikipedia:VandalismWikipedia:Do Not Disrupt Wikipedia To Illustrate A PointWikipedia:Dummy EditWikipedia:DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyCategory:Dead-end PagesWikipedia:Administrator AbuseCategory:Wikipedia Behavioral GuidelinesWikipedia:What "Ignore All Rules" MeansWikipedia:Ignore All RulesWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia Talk:Disruptive EditingWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Blocking PolicyWikipedia:Banning PolicyCategory:Wikipedia GuidelinesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesWikipedia:List Of PoliciesCategory:Wikipedia Behavioral GuidelinesWikipedia:Assume Good FaithWikipedia:Conflict Of InterestWikipedia:Courtesy VanishingWikipedia:Please Do Not Bite The NewcomersWikipedia:Do Not Disrupt Wikipedia To Illustrate A PointWikipedia:EtiquetteWikipedia:Gaming The SystemWikipedia:User PagesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesCategory:Wikipedia DiscussionWikipedia:Talk Page GuidelinesWikipedia:SignaturesCategory:Wikipedia Content GuidelinesWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources (medicine)Wikipedia:Fringe TheoriesWikipedia:Non-free ContentWikipedia:Offensive MaterialWikipedia:Do Not Include The Full Text Of Lengthy Primary SourcesWikipedia:Do Not Create HoaxesWikipedia:Patent NonsenseWikipedia:External LinksWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesCategory:Wikipedia Editing GuidelinesWikipedia:Article SizeWikipedia:Be BoldHelp:Edit SummaryWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Make Technical Articles UnderstandableWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesCategory:Wikipedia CategorizationWikipedia:Categories, Lists, And Navigation TemplatesWikipedia:CategorizationWikipedia:DisambiguationWikipedia:SubpagesCategory:Wikipedia Style GuidelinesWikipedia:Manual Of StyleWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ContentsWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ListsWikipedia:Manual Of Style/TablesCategory:Wikipedia Deletion GuidelinesWikipedia:Deletion ProcessWikipedia:Speedy KeepWikipedia:Deletion Guidelines For AdministratorsWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesTemplate:Guideline ListTemplate Talk:Guideline ListWikipedia:VandalismWikipedia:List Of PoliciesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesWikipedia:Competence Is RequiredWikipedia:Assume Good FaithWikipedia:POVWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:AdvocacyWikipedia:Conflict Of InterestWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Reliable SourcesWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:Edit WarringWikipedia:Requests For CommentWikipedia:Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:Arbitration CommitteeWikipedia:Three Revert RuleWikipedia:Three Revert RuleWikipedia:VandalismWikipedia:Disruptive EditingWikipedia:3RRWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:EnforcementWikipedia:CivilityWikipedia:NPAWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Editing PolicyWikipedia:Tendentious EditingWikipedia:VerifiabilityTemplate:Citation NeededWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:CivilityWikipedia:No Personal AttacksWikipedia:Ownership Of ArticlesWikipedia:SOCKWikipedia:MeatpuppetTemplate:ListenEnlargeWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:CONSENSUSWikipedia:The CommunityWikipedia:AGREEWikipedia:AGFWikipedia:BOLDWikipedia:CIRWikipedia:Do Not Disrupt Wikipedia To Illustrate A PointWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Reasonability RuleWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:FRINGEWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewProtoscienceGeocentric ModelGalileoWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/IncidentsWikipedia:BANWikipedia:AGFWikipedia:CIVILWikipedia:BITEWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/IncidentsWikipedia:DIFFWikipedia:DIFFWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:BOOMERANGWikipedia:Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:RSNWikipedia:3OWikipedia:RFCWikipedia:RFMTemplate:Uw-disruptive1Template:Uw-disruptive2Template:Uw-disruptive3Template:Uw-disruptive4Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/Edit WarringWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/IncidentsWikipedia:ARBCOMWikipedia:Indefinite BlockWikipedia:Rules For FoolsApril Fools' DayWikipedia:EWWikipedia:No Personal AttacksWikipedia:BLPTemplate:HumorTemplate:April FoolsTemplate:4-1Wikipedia:Avoiding Talk-page DisruptionWikipedia:Disruptive SanctionsWikipedia:GriefingWikipedia:Just Drop ItWikipedia:No Editor Is IndispensableWikipedia:Tag TeamWikipedia:TalkWikipedia:WikiBullyingTemplate:Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesTemplate Talk:Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Five PillarsWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:Ignore All RulesWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Image Use PolicyWikipedia:Wikipedia Is Not A DictionaryWikipedia:Article TitlesWikipedia:NotabilityWikipedia:AutobiographyWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources (medicine)Wikipedia:Do Not Include The Full Text Of Lengthy Primary SourcesWikipedia:PlagiarismWikipedia:Do Not Create HoaxesWikipedia:Fringe TheoriesWikipedia:Patent NonsenseWikipedia:External LinksWikipedia:CivilityWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:Editing PolicyWikipedia:HarassmentWikipedia:VandalismWikipedia:Ignore All RulesWikipedia:No Personal AttacksWikipedia:Ownership Of ContentWikipedia:Edit WarringWikipedia:Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:Sock PuppetryWikipedia:No Legal ThreatsWikipedia:Child ProtectionWikipedia:Paid-contribution DisclosureWikipedia:Assume Good FaithWikipedia:Conflict Of InterestWikipedia:Do Not Disrupt Wikipedia To Illustrate A PointWikipedia:EtiquetteWikipedia:Gaming The SystemWikipedia:Please Do Not Bite The NewcomersWikipedia:Courtesy VanishingWikipedia:Deletion PolicyWikipedia:Proposed DeletionWikipedia:Criteria For Speedy DeletionWikipedia:Attack PageWikipedia:OversightWikipedia:Proposed Deletion Of Biographies Of Living PeopleWikipedia:Proposed Deletion (books)Wikipedia:Revision DeletionWikipedia:AdministratorsWikipedia:Banning PolicyWikipedia:Blocking PolicyWikipedia:Protection PolicyWikipedia:Article SizeWikipedia:Be BoldWikipedia:DisambiguationWikipedia:HatnoteWikipedia:Set Index ArticlesWikipedia:SubpagesWikipedia:User PagesWikipedia:Talk Page GuidelinesWikipedia:SignaturesWikipedia:Broad-concept ArticleWikipedia:Project NamespaceWikipedia:WikiProject Council/GuideWikipedia:Manual Of StyleWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ContentsWikipedia:Manual Of Style/AccessibilityWikipedia:Make Technical Articles UnderstandableWikipedia:Manual Of Style/Dates And NumbersWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ImagesWikipedia:Manual Of Style/LayoutWikipedia:Manual Of Style/Lead SectionWikipedia:Manual Of Style/LinkingWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ListsWikipedia:Categories, Lists, And Navigation TemplatesWikipedia:CategorizationWikipedia:Template NamespaceWikipedia:List Of Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:List Of PoliciesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesWikipedia:PrinciplesHelp:CategoryCategory:Wikipedia Behavioral GuidelinesCategory:Wikipedia Dispute ResolutionCategory:Wikipedia Move-protected Project PagesCategory:Wikipedia Semi-protected Project PagesDiscussion About Edits From This IP Address [n]A List Of Edits Made From This IP Address [y]View The Project Page [c]Discussion About The Content Page [t]This Page Is Protected. You Can View Its Source [e]Visit The Main Page [z]Guides To Browsing WikipediaFeatured Content – The Best Of WikipediaFind Background Information On Current EventsLoad A Random Article [x]Guidance On How To Use And Edit WikipediaFind Out About WikipediaAbout The Project, What You Can Do, Where To Find ThingsA List Of Recent Changes In The Wiki [r]List Of All English Wikipedia Pages Containing Links To This Page [j]Recent Changes In Pages Linked From This Page [k]Upload Files [u]A List Of All Special Pages [q]Wikipedia:AboutWikipedia:General Disclaimer

view link view link view link view link view link