As a new user, you should learn by looking around. See South Korea for example, for an article that has references and citations. Wikipedia articles are not essays by editors; they are to represent facts that are documented in secondary sources. Otherwise any part of, or the entire, article can deleted from WP. This happens on a regular basis. You should read, understand, and follow the WP rules if you expect to contribute to it. Hmains (talk) 02:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Welcome...
Hello, Jack332, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place ((helpme))
on your talk page and ask your question there.
I hope that this helps you to improve the Military Balance article
Again, welcome! SpinningSpark 12:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, your edits to Military Balance make me believe that you are the same person as User talk:Jack330. If you have opened two accounts in error, please indicate this on the account that is now unused. Also, please provide a redirect from the unsused account to the live one to assist editors to find you. If you have a valid reason for using two different accounts, you should still make it clear on your userpage that this is so. Otherwise you are leaving yourself open to accusations of sockpuppetry which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Thankyou. SpinningSpark 12:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Military Balance, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military Balance. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. SpinningSpark 13:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Please, do not enter automatically translated text in the article. It creates a mess, which creates unneeded work for other users. The text for the First stage section you entereted is very poorly written, and half of the information simply does not fit there. - Tourbillon A ? 08:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I have NOT entered automatically translated text in the article. But thanks for your help,anyway. But please do not breach the article with the souce"Japan's defence Ministry's analyst's back ground explanation about Taepodong Loanch test" interviewed by Nikkei. By the way, simple question.You writing the article about DPRK but you live in Sophia how you are getting the detailed information? And I can understand Iran's Nuke is more important for you,but analyst commented that the back ground of "ICBM loanch test" is desire of Unification. And its very important for asian peoples Please do not delite it--Jack332 (talk) 11:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Just a head's up...best to upload an image to Wikipedia (fair use, of course), then edit the article to display such a pic, rather than post a link directly to an image in a personal blog. - SoSaysChappy (talk) 10:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Regarding Picture& Design Drawings please aprove to use private HP's one TENTATIVELY. Now i'm mailing Photo owner's HP and asking his approval....--Jack332 (talk) 10:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Musudan (missile). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. tedder (talk) 12:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
This article which you have created appears to be an opinion discussion rather than a factual encyclopedia article.
It does not cite any missile proliferation or geopolitical sources (see our policy on reliable sources). It appears to be a synthesis document and opinion piece, which Wikipedia is not here for (see our policies WP:NOT#OR and WP:OR and WP:SYN).
We simply are not here to host this type of opinion article.
I am going to re-redirect the article again, as other administrators have done twice already. Please do not change the redirect again without discussing here. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi I've got your point And I'm sorry that I add on INF part in the Article But I think there are some mis-understanding between us Basically I wrote the article based on "Internarional Crisis Group's" this Report [1]"The Asian Balance of Weapons of Mass Desruction"
So basically the article is NOT my private opinion That is ICG's opinion, and also wide spred people's concern
And if someone Write the article about Grobal warming,based on the Stern Review it is not against Wikipedia's Rule.
"If your truth is NOT original reserch, then it should be easy to find Famous person's/Organization's report/article about it"
So,My second proposal is" I delite INF part and rewrite the article's Main Part based on ICG report" I hope you kindly accept my second proposal
BTW please suggest your opinion abt "which is the better title? " "List of East Asia countries by size of Theater Missile force " "The Asian Balance of Weapons of Mass Desruction" --Jack332 (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Pal
--Jack332 (talk) 19:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Please stop changing the military expenditure of China without first using the talk page. We all need to discuss your proposed changes as I cannot see how you come to the various numbers you have been using.
China, (like almost all countries in the world), do not declare their full military budget, but I seriously doubt the US has a better insight on the Chinese budget than anybody else. Again, please use the talk page so we can discuss your proposed changes before making any more. FFMG (talk) 17:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Several editors have complained from your contributions, mostly because they are poorly written (in bad english). Encyclopedic content must be added in fine english. If you experience any problems with english language, I suggest you fill your user page with Babel language templates (so that we can know what languages you speak) and create your own sandbox (example: User:Jack332/Sandbox). You can divide the sandbox page in several sections and enter your information there, after which other users will edit the text so that it can be entered freely in the article it is intended for. - Tourbillon A ? 11:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I think if cited informations are correct "Truly aren't reliable"is just your biased private opinion,isn't it? Please do not breach articles just based on your private opinion. --Jack332 (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I left a comment for you there.
Please note that the comment below isnotcopied and pasted from the North Korean WMD talk page.
The information you added was poorly written, and was not well sourced. And the sources you added werent reliable, as they are likely to be biased in favor of or against the topic. If you can find completely neutral sources, you may take your claims back to the talk page. Until that time, I do not believe we can allow you to revert the article back. Thanks, Ono (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi
Hi And if you think My article is Biased then please suggest which part you want to change. If you are busy please inform I will write Complomised article for NPOV.--Jack332 (talk) 18:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Please do not copy and paste your comments from one page to another, as you did from the North Korea WMD page to my talk page. If you want to leave a comment, I would appreciate it if you would write a new one, instead of pasting something I have already read. Thanks, Ono (talk) 18:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I copied and pasted my comment because you did it to me(Citation required). It was a point (that obviously went over your head) to prove that it is annoying to read something you have already read several times on SEVERAL different pages. Thanks, Ono (talk) 18:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
--Jack332 (talk) 19:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I am not entirely sure what you are trying to say. Thanks, Ono (talk) 19:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I recommend you to read the five pillars of Wikipedia. You edited without any source and your writing is also poor. So I reverted your edits, which also seem like POV pushing from one side. Besides, the first half of your alteration does not stick to the existent source. Since here is to write and edit articles with reliable sources, you have to abide by the rule. Otherwise you will get in troubles. Regards.--Caspian blue 16:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)