User talk:86.160.120.47

Welcome
User:Marek69. 15:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Ageless
Hi,

Your edits to "ageless", though appreciated, are inappropriate for a variety of reasons. It looks like a combination of a disambiguation page, miscellaneous collection of vageuly-related topics plus a bit of a dictionary, a bit of a soapbox for bioidentical hormone replacement therapy, a fair bit of original research, and a coatrack for plastic surgery and a variety of other pages. A couple people have also reverted to the immortality page, indicating that there is no consensus for the page to exits. As such, I would suggest not recreating the page.

Thanks, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 13:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Blond, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. SQGibbon (talk) 22:47, 4 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.

Angel
Please stop joke edits listing angels living in Europe, etc. The article lists them as existing in Jewish thought etc. This can you blocked. History2007 (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

English People
Some of your editing to English People have been very constructive.I fully agree with you that people are not less English because they have recent ancestry from other countries and continents, and you are right to edit the article to reflect this. However, the facts remain that the majority of English people are mainly of indigenous ancestry, and that the dominant (though not the sole) influences on English culture come from long-standing indigenous people. It is therefore a distortion to try, as you have done, to suppress any preeminence at all given to people of longstanding English background. This tends to give an impression of an intention to present a particular point of view. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on English People. 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 refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to English People. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

3rr report
Made here -- Snowded TALK  15:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war. 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.