User talk:Kanola51

Ken Ring
Hi Kanola51, I reverted your changes to Ken Ring (astrologer). They were all cited and it is best to discuss cited material you disagree with at the talk page. I agree that it all comes across rather negative at the moment and the article could do with some reveiws or support of his ideas that are citeable (see WP:RS). AIR corn (talk) 02:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, not sure why you are deleting so much material and references in that topic, if you have a good reason add it to talk page and let us know in you edits, otherwise it is bad edits, please stop. Thanks  Rmzadeh  ►  00:53, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I have started a disccusion at Talk:Ken Ring (astrologer). I recommend you address your concerns there before making any more major changes to the article. AIR corn (talk) 01:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Please explain your concerns on the article talk page, and introduce new sources there. Continually removing sourced information from the article and adding unsourced material will only get you blocked from editing.- gadfium 04:35, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. gadfium 06:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I would like to collaborate with you on this article. The way you are going about it at the moment will likely end in another much longer block and the article being protected. Despite what you might think it is not a witch hunt here, most people just want to make this encyclopaedia better. I do not know Ring and in fact only heard of him after the Earthquakes and all the information I have comes from articles and the web. I am guessing you might know him better and could help to improve the accuracy of this article. In particular I am curious as to why the information about his business that was sourced from these  interviews is being deleted. It does not seem that controversial and is in a reasonably reliable source. Has it changed since then or was it just miss-reported?AIR corn  (talk) 23:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. gadfium 00:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

If you wish to discuss the article, you can still do so on this page.- gadfium 00:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Editing your article
You can not remove cited information and replace it with uncited information, even if you know it is false. Every thing we say on here is simply a repetition of what someone else has already said. We attribute it to when necessary. In biographies this is even more important. You have an obvious conflict of interest in the Ken Ring article so extra care must be taken when editing it. I have left a note at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Hopefully someone experienced with these situations and who is not familiar with you can look over the article and offer some suggestions. Feel free to add your own information at the noticeboard. Regards AIR corn (talk) 04:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * If you are unhappy with your article, you should raise your concerns first on the talk page of the article, and if not satisfied at WP:BLPN. You shouldn't be making major changes in it. Dougweller (talk) 05:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Kanola51. I see you have returned to this article again today and removed information that is properly sourced, and replaced it with unsourced or poorly sourced information. Please do not remove any material with proper citations from the article. If you do so again, it could result in a loss of editing priviledges. -- Diannaa  (Talk) 21:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing
It appears that you have continued to edit your article after various warnings. While I can understand that you may feel misrepresented on this website, the unfortunate truth is that we can only have properly cited information in the articles on Wikipedia, and it is particularly problematic when you remove information which was properly cited. Your own self-assertion of the facts is insufficient evidence for changing this website, especially when you have a conflict of interest in the article. Considering the problems you've had editing on this article, and given your conflict of interest in this article, I highly recommend that you simply bring your concerns up on the article talk page and ask for other editors to make the changes, instead of making them yourself.