User talk:Amonloki

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Sandbox for test edits. That's what talk pages are for. Chris 00:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 which gains a consensus among editors. --ElKevbo 19:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Removal of "frivoulous content" from the Transhumanism article
The following exchange is from the Talk:Transhumanism page:

"The first self-described transhumanists met formally in the early 1980..."

I don't see exactly why this content was removed (called frivolous). If it is inaccurate, that is if the meeting should for some reason not be considered a part of a more serious transhumanist movement, then I guess it could be frivolous. But I don't really see that as being the argument. Why, exactly, should the material be removed? Smmurphy(Talk) 19:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. User:Amonloki keeps deleting content from the history section of the Transhumanism article which was a product of the collaborative work that was done to make Transhumanism not only a well written, comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and stable article but ensure that it was identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community and therefore featured on the main page of Wikipedia.


 * Arguing that this content is frivilous in one's view is not enough to justify deleting it. --Loremaster 21:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know what the problem is about describing the first steps in organising a cultural and intellectual movement. Metamagician3000 01:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know either. However, if you look at the edit history of the article, Amonloki seems unwilling to listen to reason. As a Wikipedia administrator, can you please intervene if he "strikes" again? --Loremaster 02:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * amonloki is obviously a sockpuppet, with less than a month old edit history of just two articles, both of those undiscussed and POV. Yet somehow amonloki knows all about wiki policy, or thinks it does. Sockpuppet, and should be labeled as such. Chris 03:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)