User talk:74.190.55.226

Welcome
TallNapoleon (talk) 09:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. --SineBot (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Sullivan
Instead of continuing to vandalize the Andrew Sullivan talk page, as you did here, please try engaging in actual discussion. UserVOBO (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * My edit was only to repair the vandalism by another user. Under WikiPedia rules that is not vandalism. It appears you are not open to meaningful discussion on this issue and just wish to censor topics you disagree with.  I will ask again, please point by point explain why ALL of the additions I made are improper or biased.  Your arbitrarily removing every single addition clearly betrays YOUR bias on this issue.


 * I didn't look at all of your additions. They contained enough vandalism and BLP-violation that it was clear they had to be reverted. If any of your changes are legitimate, then please discuss them on the talk page, and get consensus to make them. UserVOBO (talk) 22:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * So you're admitting you didn't even read the additions I made, you just completely removed all of them? That is vandalism in itself according to Wikipedia rules.  You realize that don't you?


 * I read some of them. Referring to Sullivan's "transient views on the war on terror", for example, introduces an inappropriate tone of an insulting and derogatory kind. That's vandalism. My reverting you is not. UserVOBO (talk) 22:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Removing content without reading it is obviously vandalism under the rules. Also, I'm not sure you are aware of the meaning of the word "transient".  It is not pejorative or insulting and imputes no tone.  Please look up the meaning of the word and then you'll understand why it is appropriate to describe someone's views who have changed frequently.


 * I read enough of your additions to see that they included vandalism. That is enough reason for removing them. UserVOBO (talk) 22:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * My friend, Wikipedia is not your personal domain. You violated Wikipedia rules by removing legitimate additions to a page WITHOUT EVEN READING them.  Please refrain from doing so.

March 2010
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war&#32;at Andrew Sullivan. 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 believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. CIreland (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.