User talk:Magnus5000

Explanation of removal of added words on Wishbone (TV series)
Hello. I am starting this topic to explain to you why the words you added to the Wishbone (TV series) article have been reverted. There seems to be no explanation or justification for your addition of the words "and disturbing" to the description of Wanda Gilmore. In my opinion, such additions without justification or explanation constitute defamation of a fictional character, which in part contributes to defamatory aspersions about the show. However, I'm inclined not to call it as such until I hear an explanation from you about it on the article talk page. If there IS a reason these words should be included, an explanation other than "just two words" needs to be provided, either in the edit summary field or on the article talk page. Otherwise, such edits made without explanation will continue to be reverted because there is no explanation of why they belong there, nor was there a source given for the additional words. When contributing to an online encyclopedia, personal feelings about a particular aspect of any one article must be placed aside in favor of the policies that govern contributions to such articles or their aspects. I may be sounding off needlessly, and if that's the case, I apologize. However, before this change is reverted back again, I would like to hear an explanation from you about why it is valid and necessary and what (if any) source you have to justify such a change. If there IS justification, and I'm not saying there isn't, but if there IS, then that will need to be explained before the change is made. And that can best be done by filling out the edit summary field more clearly and/or discussing it on the talk page. When in doubt, the best course is to ALWAYS discuss ANY change, no matter how minor, on the talk page. That allows input from other editors to be taken into account BEFORE the change is made, and then that way, more than one editor can contribute feedback on the appropriateness/propriety of such changes. I therefore invite you to provide input on the proposed addition you wish to make on the article talk page. In the meantime, if you would care to, you are more than welcome to discuss this further with me on my talk page. I hope all this is helpful to you and that you don't misunderstand me. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 19:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mason eats babies
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Mason eats babies, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. DJ Bullfish  22:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Mason eats babies has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)