User talk:136.159.49.125

July 2015
Hello, I'm DuncanHill. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Herbert Kitchener, 1st Earl Kitchener because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 22:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

October 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves was changed by 136.159.49.125 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.95125 on 2015-10-22T19:11:28+00:00.

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

The Onion
Please look at the article again and look at the edits that were made. The Univision aspect is clearly covered in the section on the Chicago history of the publication and there is no dispute of Univision’s role, but the placement of that info was incorrect. Please do a simple page search in your browser for “Univision” to see what I mean. Also the “Hillary Clinton Stance” aspect is a tad ridiculous; the publication has a history of being an equal opportunity offender so it reads like an original research conspiracy theory. That said, it is interesting to see that Univision’s investors *might* affect content, but until that happens it’s just speculation and gossip as far as encyclopedic content is concerned. --SpyMagician (talk) 01:29, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

April 2017
Hello, I'm Mélencron. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to April 21 have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mélencron (talk) 01:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.