User talk:98.115.66.194

Conflict of interest policy
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

You appear to be a sockpuppet of --Ronz (talk) 21:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you should avoid or exercise great caution, not that you cannot comment at all upon certain edits. The link deleted was clearly a personal attack, by Wtshymanksi, when you look at the screw talk page. The link on the hinge page exceeds all expectations of a wikipedia link, and was believed to be a sufficient link by many other wikipedia editors for over a year. I believe Wtshymanski, now has a personal issue in this dispute and his editing should be undone.

July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Desk, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. Airplaneman  ✈  Review? 19:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The burden is on the editor to provide substantiation to include an EL. Until you do this, I see no reason as to why we should include this link. I would discuss the issue on the talk page of the article and find a consensus if you want it to be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.115.66.194 (talk • contribs)
 * In the diff I provided above, you blanked the whole section. Now that you have removed just the external link, I am fine with it. Happy editing, Airplaneman   ✈  Review? 19:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

My bad, thanks.

Wikipedia is better including my link and that was my argument. So, I was an advocate for improving Wikipedia. And please do not pretend like my argument was not intelligent. My views were well thought out and articulated by Wikipedia's guidelines. What more can you ask? I accepted the consensus and then began to enforce the consensus' policy. So, if by "disrupting" you mean enforcing your own policies, then yes I did disrupt, haha. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. All of your policies are simply guidelines, and therefore you enforce them quite arbitrarily, with a thin veil of neutrality over the bias. Karma will catch up with Wiki, no worries.