108.26.225.219

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Dividend tax did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . Again, welcome.  - Arjayay (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-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. MrOllie (talk) 13:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dividend tax. - Arjayay (talk) 13:41, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:108.26.225.219 reported by User:MrOllie (Result: ). Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 13:59, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Dividend tax. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Dear Arjayay: I would like to comment on your actions regarding edit war on "Dividend Tax" page that resulted in blocking me for 24 hours. I am already unblocked, but lost interest in editing since it looks unreasonable to me. For your benefit (and in case you will want to undo the harm, which I do not mean to do myself anymore), here are some explanations.

The war takes two sides. It was not me who started reverting, I was only restoring the old text deleted by Pencil Pusher. His stated motivation for deleting was the lack of source for the statement that all resources of a corporation are owned by its shareholders. This is a fake reason since the statement is self-evident. In fact, looking at the talk page I see that Pencil Pusher himself strongly objected to unreasonable demands for sources in the "Arguments in favor" section of the article. The obvious difference is that "arguments against" do not enjoy as much of his protectiveness.

I think supporters of Dividend Tax should put arguments (or criticize counterarguments) in the "Arguments in favor" section, not remove "arguments against" with made-up reasons. I myself think there are many valid arguments for and against. (The very existence of such sections obviously indicates a controversy.) It is important to have an unbiased representation of discussion, criticizing the opposing arguments rather than removing them.

And as a technical matter, since the first revert was not mine, it was not me who deserved to be blocked but rather those who reverted the original text (using one or several accounts). P.S. If you are not the one who has decided the block, you may consider sharing this explanation with him/her/them. 108.26.225.219 (talk) 20:52, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

---