User talk:Freethinkersusan

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Mushroom (Talk) 16:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007
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 that gains a consensus among editors. Gscshoyru 20:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Richard Dawkins
Hi. You will see that I have reverted your edit to Richard Dawkins, citing the rather cryptic WP:BLP. WP needs to be very careful, through fairness, in the material concerning living persons. In this particular case you did not get your citation from the source quoted, but from a report of the source, which turned out to be wrong. A more detailed explanation here. ATB --Old Moonraker 20:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I see that you have replaced the material. Please see this link, where the original "allegator" retracts his allegation. --Old Moonraker 20:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to keep on with this, but you have jumped into a hot topic with your first series of edits! You have now provided the direct link as the citation for the material, as recommended above, but it doesn't seem to support your statement completely. For example, how does "[Eugenics being] too dangerous for comfortable discussion" (Dawkins, Sunday Herald) translate into "Dawkins has been accused on several occasions of involvement in ideologies promoting eugenics" (your addition)? In view of the strict WP:BLP policy you would need to explain in more detail on the article talk page. Again, my apologies—the discussion here only started as an explanation for my reverting your edits. The main discussion should be on the article talk page. --Old Moonraker 21:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Freethinkersusan - by all means propose an addition to the Dawkins article which brings in his views on eugenics, but please do so in a way which does not simply tack it on as a swipe at the man (apart from anything else, remember WP:BLP). Build it in to an adequate discussion of the issue, in an appropriate place in the article, taking in what Dawkins has said on the matter and how others have responded. And, in view of the history of the page, I strongly recommend that you first propose your draft text on the talk page, rather than getting involved in edit-warring on the issue. Thanks for listening. Snalwibma 10:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

James Watson
I reverted your edit because it didn't address the problems I mentioned in my edit summary.P4k 21:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC) TC)

Block
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. Ronnotel 00:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)