User talk:Axa4975

What you curently are doing at the evolution page is called vandalism, expecially in a page that have been discussed with so many people. If you have serious contribution to make, please discuss that first at the talk page with the regular editors. --KimvdLinde 02:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

What you are doing is called blatant censorship and my contribution is much more serious than anyone elses contribution on that page so far. If you do not fear the truth why do you keep trying to hide it? Is that what science is about? Can you really call yourself a scientist? --Axa4975 02:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

No, I remove strong POV. If you feel what you have to say is important, have a discussion first at the talk page, we are always open for alternatives that can be sufficiently substantiated with underlying scientific research. --KimvdLinde 02:59, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

A fact is not a POV, all I did was state obvious facts about problems with the theory many evolutionists are aware of already. The theory is flawed and that fact needs to be addressed. What you are doing is hiding facts. --Axa4975 03:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Creationism, ID ect are nit even science, and there is only a small grouop of scientists that believs in it. It has not established itself, and they have not published anything substantial in the peer-reviewed literature. --KimvdLinde 03:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, you win (or so you think), I will stop trying to complete the Evolution article by including critisms and/or facts that were never presented or ommitted. It is really my own fault, I forget how "enlightened" and "open-minded" the "modern scientific" community really is. If not you, someone else would have censored the facts I presented. Keep in mind that true scientists do not ommitt facts in their search for the truth and actions like yours only serve to keep minds in the dark. --Axa4975 03:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I invite you for the discussion at the talk page, lets discuss. I am a religous person, and I believe in a lot of things. See you at the evolution talk page --KimvdLinde 03:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Friendly Reminder
Hi, just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia has a 3 revert rules, meaning that an editor must not perform more than three reversions on the same article within 24 hours. Regards, --Hurricane111 03:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. Keep on reverting the article will not solve the problem.  I will suggest to both you and KimvdLinde to discuss it in the article's talk page.  (KimvdLinde also had replied to my message and I'll suggest the same thing)  Resolving disputes has great tips on resolving dispute.  If both of you cannot resolve the dispute, maybe you should seek third opinion.  Meanwhile, I hope both of you won't edit/escalate the article just to cool down a bit.  --Hurricane111 03:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:IWantToBelieveEvo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:IWantToBelieveEvo.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you. -- Carnildo 13:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)