User talk:Jamikel

The information about Jim Miller in the MID-LIFT post that is locked out from editing is slanderous. Either remove the lock or remove the citing, since you seem to violate your own policies on objectivity.

The article you just contributed, MID-LIFT, appears to violate Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please review WP:COPYRIGHT and modify the article; a restricted release as you appear to have stated is not permissible, and may result in the article's deletion. Furthermore, the article appears to describe a proprietary product, and may be considered advertising. Please document notability in accordance with Wikipedia policy.  Acroterion  (talk)  01:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2013
I've reverted your changes to three articles: Kurt Russell, Mid-lift, and Tequila Sunrise (film). In all three cases you are adding your own commentary to the articles, which is unacceptable. In the Russell and movie articles, you were adding patently promotional material that belongs in a fan magazine, if anywhere, but not in an encyclopedia. In the other article, you were still commenting in your own voice. This seems to be a problem with many of your edits. Consider this a warning; if you persist in these kinds of edits, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:19, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Kurt Russell, you may be blocked from editing. Bbb23 (talk) 04:24, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I haven't edited MID-LIFT in months, or years. The last edit was because you didn't flag or remove someone else's edit that was erroneous and slanderous.

I agree with the slant on Russell and Tequilla Sunrise, but each could have been edited to meet with your limited criteria while still allowing the objective content that was missing from both posts.

I haven't seen what revision you've made to MID-LIFT, but I'll check; is any "factual" editing of the two other posts allowed, or is ANY editing on my part BANNED?
 * The Mid-lift edit is very old, but it's the same problem. You haven't made many edits to Wikipedia and they've been very sporadic. I'm not trying to prevent you from editing, but you're you going to have to figure out how to edit responsibly. Otherwise, you're going to get in trouble. It's also hard to understand after you were reverted so many times on the Russell article that you continued to add the same material. You should read up on Wikipedia policies and guidelines before moving forward. After I finish this, I'll add a so-called Welcome message that has links to those policies and guidelines.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:37, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Jamikel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, many of your contributions do not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Bbb23 (talk) 04:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Yeah, well, I figured it out. Whatever editing I have done was based on correcting information, more than trying to impose an opinion. If me ego was so fragile as that, it doesn't seem logical I would post corrections without a byline. I FORGOT how fragile the line between fact and opinion is for Wikipedia. I've made the corrections to Kurt Russell and Tequila Sunrise that SHOULD meet with your high objective standards. I see someone else tried to edit my edit as well, which I edited their edit of my edit to include what I thought should be noted in giving Russell credit for Directing Tombstone, which the edit I edited didn't edit. Okay? We good? Thanks. Been real. I'll try to comport to your limitations. :-)
 * Please learn to WP:SIGN your posts. I'm having trouble following you. The only change you've made is to the Russell article. The last change to the film article was mine. As for your latest change to the Russell article, it's a a bit of an improvement, but it's still not acceptable. The first paragraph about Russell's involvement in Tequila Sunrise has no sources. The edit to the Tombstone is worse. You say that thing about directing with no source to back it up. You use a contraction (wasn't), which is unencyclopedic. You use the word "legendary", which is wholly unnecessary, and then you use the word "supported" instead of "co-starring" as if you're promoting Russell. I'm going to revert your edit now, but I wanted to explain why. You should also know that you have now reverted three times. Please pay attention to WP:3RR. Frankly, I think you need to stop editing these articles. If you want to change them, propose the material on the article talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:02, 3 October 2013 (UTC)