User talk:Dimzz

Feb 2013
Hello, I'm MarnetteD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MarnetteD | Talk 00:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did to The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. MarnetteD | Talk 19:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Bill Russell. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. MarnetteD | Talk 19:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Please stop
Hello. Please try to understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a fan forum. You like the film and so do I but the entry you are continually adding violates several Wikipedia policies including WP:NPOV. The article for the film has a reception section has a reception section where both criticism and praise for the film are covered in detail. If you truly wish to learn how to edit here I would suggest that you go to the Teahouse and ask questions and, perhaps, request a mentor to help you get going. MarnetteD | Talk 02:28, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Feb 2013
Your recent editing history at The Good, the Bad and the Ugly shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. MarnetteD | Talk 00:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Science
Scientific articles should refer to fact and logic only. Even with a source of sorts, talk about anyone's being revered is best confined to one's own web-site.

April 2014
Hi Dimzz, I've reverted your edit to Martin Luther because it duplicated material, expressed in an appropriately neutral tone, which was already present in the first sentence of the article. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 06:36, 26 April 2014 (UTC)