User talk:201.17.103.84

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and gives you many benefits, including:
 * The use of a username of your choice, provided that it is appropriate.
 * The use of your own personal watchlist to which you can add articles that interest you.
 * The ability to start new pages.
 * The ability to rename pages.
 * The ability to edit semi-protected pages.
 * The ability to upload images.
 * The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website.
 * The eligibility to become an administrator.
 * Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.

We hope you enjoy your time here on Wikipedia and that you choose to become a Wikipedian by  [ creating an account] . Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, you should sign your name to your posts and comments with &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. Jacqui ★ 21:24, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

3RR
Please refrain from trying to force extremist propaganda into 2005 civil unrest in France. You have already reverted this article no less than four time, which is significantly higher than what is acceptable. I expect you to behave properly from now on, or suffer my displeasure. Rama 21:01, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thing is, 201.17.103.84, that two or three editors have decided that the material in question is unsuitable and have reverted your edits. I know you're experienced enough to have used the talk page in the past, but this time you just tried to bluster ahead by an edit war, which is firstly disruptive and secondly guaranteed not to get you the result that you want.  Please use the talk page more, and make your case for the edits you do when they're opposed, and be prepared to collaborate with, rather than fight against, other editors.


 * If you cannot do that, and you persist in reverting, I or someone else will have to block you from editing for a bit. --Tony Sidaway Talk 14:54, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

The choice of words here is disturbing, especially when it comes to improving an article. "Extremist propaganda" is the one that sticks out right away. It's quite disgusting that you would throw that word into an article that is in dire need of updating and improvement. Actually, I have no idea what this is about nor why I received a message regarding this.