User talk:Kokota

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. M a  rtinp23  23:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove protection tags from pages - doing so is considered vandalism and you may be banned for it. By removeing the tag, nothing happens really, as the page is still protected. It's just a waste of time -- M  a  rtinp23  23:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Insane Clown Posse
I have placed a suspected sock puppet template on your userpage, due to your edit to Insane Clown Posse being identical to that of a banned vandal. This doesn't mean you're banned or anything, but the similarities are too close to be ignored, so I have put it up just to be safe. If a long period of time passes without any trouble, I'll remove it.--Rosicrucian 14:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * As you have not continued this edit trend, I've removed the suspected sock tag as promised.--Rosicrucian 13:31, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

note from annoying admin FreplySpang
If you continue to change Wikipedia articles to make the facts false, as you have done with Academy Award for Best Animated Feature, you will be blocked from editing. Please stop doing this immediately. FreplySpang 12:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't particularly care if you call me "annoying" - other people may. What I care about is that you are putting incorrect information into Wikipedia articles. Don't do that. FreplySpang 12:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The other problem with using the "rv edits by annoying user X" edit summaries is that people are less likely to take you seriously. If you revert my edits because, I don't know, you actually think it's important to talk about espresso macchiato in the intro to the Cappuccino article, that's one thing. But if you're doing it just because you happen to be annoyed at me, you'll soon be blocked as a troll. FreplySpang 12:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

opportunity cost
"the most second best alternative" is not even an acceptable English phrase, nevermind that it lacks information that the phrase you replaced it with provided.

Please feel free to point out that "the most valuable foregone alternative" is another way of saying "the second best option"; however, do not revert again to the incorrect version.

Thanks!

RandomP 12:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Pgk blocked me with an expiry time of 48 hours due to "Disruption, reverting edits based on user rather than content"
Is "reverting edits based on user rather than content" against wikipedia policy? Is it? Please tell me where is that written.... Kokota 13:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's part of WP:NPA.--Rosicrucian 11:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)