User talk:99.191.218.97

Kluger agency article
I recently expanded the rather lacklustre Kluger agency article and included some information that was cited from a reliable source. However, it appears that shortly afterwards you removed large sections of the article without any mention of your reasons on either the article's talk page or your edit summary.

Furthermore, you removed the company stub template from the article—which in my opinion was wholly deserved—and then added an external link to an unnecessary site (that seems like a press release).

I am going to revert back and then modify the language used in my original edit to make it more neutral. Please visit the article again and make any edits you deem necessary, but please given a (good) reason in the article's talk page or, at the very least, the edit summary.

Thanks, Fakelvis (talk) 10:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Further edits to Kluger agency article
You appear to be ignoring the request I lodged above regarding the editing of this article. You have repeatedly removed large chunks of this article that I have written that are cited with reliable sources and verifiable information, without giving reasons.

I will, once again, reinstate these changes. If you feel the need to once again revert my changes, I will request a third opinion so that we can maybe come to some arrangement over this article's content - I don't want this to turn into an edit war. If you do make changes though, please give reason(s) in the article's talk page, or the edit summary.

I have no vested interest in this article, and merely want to make the entry encyclopaedic. As this article was only created once the Pussycat Dolls controversy was reported on Wired News, I feel this should stay in the article. For now I am assuming good faith and civility - please do the same.

Thanks, Fakelvis (talk) 09:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

3 Revert rule
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. --Jojhutton (talk) 21:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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 a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Jojhutton (talk) 21:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Information written on this post are fictional taken from fabricated material posted on wired.com by the anti-advertising association. 99.191.218.97 (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been 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. Postoak (talk) 22:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 15:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/keywordrenewals for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 15:13, 31 August 2012 (UTC)