|
Welcome!
Hello, 70.79.75.159! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking  or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! sinneed ( talk) 22:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Getting started
|
|
|
Getting help
|
|
|
Policies and guidelines
|
|
|
The community
|
|
Writing articles
|
|
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
|
|
Please use edit summaries.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia.
I see that you have made a number of edits to Roman Polanski. This is a heavily disputed and very weakly sourced article. I very respectfully request that each editor please use edit summaries so that we, the other editors interested in the article, will have an understanding of what is intended by the edits. Thank you for your edits. All the best. sinneed (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
April 2009
 Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Mad as a March hare. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. 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. As has been asked already, please use edit summaries so we know your intentions. tedder (talk) 06:35, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
- Thanks for posting the edit summary- I see what you were after, and it looks fine to me. It's just suspicious when an IP editor removes sourced content. Hope to see you around! tedder (talk) 06:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
March 2010
 Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Raw Power has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. –Turian (talk) 00:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Duran Duran (1983 video) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 02:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Sadism and masochism in fiction. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. [1] / edg ☺ ☭ 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Sadism and masochism in fiction, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. [2] / edg ☺ ☭ 11:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My Apologies
I clicked on the wrong button sorry and ended up undoing your work by mistake. I have no problem with your edits to Duran Duran (1983 video). Keep it up AIRcorn (talk) 06:16, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
April 2010
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Jean-Luc Godard, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Oneiros (talk) 09:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.
- What "incorrect" information, pray tell, did I introduce to the Jean-Luc Godard article? I merely made a correction: changing the date of Two or Three Things I Know About Her from 1967 to 1966. The correct date for that film is 1966, as it was made at the same time as Made in U.S.A.. If you doubt me, check the imdb and see for yourself. How dare you accuse me of "vandalism"! Piss off, you arrogant, self-righteous ignoramus!
- IMDB says Two or Three Things I Know About Her was made in 1967. I assume this settles it? freshacconci talktalk 10:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please note the following:
- You should not make changes to articles unless you can provide reliable sources to support your changes.
- Imdb is not a reliable source, as it is open for anyone to edit.
- The number of films which have been given dates by various other editors which are wrong by one year, and for which you are able to correct the date is surprising.
- You should be civil to other editors, even if you think they are mistaken. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There are many, many books on the subject which verify that the dates I have given for the films in addition to the imdb. I am right, the previous information given was wrong. If you don't like what I have to say in response to the insulting comments made against me, then you shouldn't make them in the first place.
- (1) If there are many books verifying the dates then please cite one or more of them as references. (2) I am sorry if any of my comments were insulting: I certainly didn't intend them to be. Can you please point me to what I wrote which you found insulting? JamesBWatson (talk) 11:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jean-Luc Godard. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. freshacconci talktalk 10:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
- I am most definitely right and you are wrong. I have the books to prove it. Don't threaten me, you ignorant troll!
 This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Jean-Luc Godard, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Oneiros (talk) 17:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You're the ones being disruptive, not I. Read a book on the subject, for God's sake, and you will see I'm right - and stop harassing me!
- You are welcome to discuss that on the talk page after your block has expired.--Oneiros (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
September 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to Ray Davies, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. — Jeff G. ツ 01:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Alfie↑↓© 09:12, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
October 2010
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Rod Serling. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Aaron north (T/C) 23:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
- Er his edits did most certainly NOT constitute vandalism! He was actually trying to revert vandalism and your (sorry but I have to say) somewhat mindless reversion and templating here did not help matters in the least. Not all people editing without accounts are vandals. Theresa Knott | Sort that Knee! 00:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
