User talk:Mickleover

Your edits to Duke University
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. DukeEGR93 03:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Everything I added to both the Duke University and Peter Feaver entries was factually correct. Therefore please explain how it was vandalism unless comments not singing Duke's praises is considered unacceptable. I am surprised by your negative and extreme response and your lack of dialogue on this. Thanks!

October 2012
Hello, I'm Ironholds. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ''I see you've spent the last couple of years posting what is quite frankly editorialised information. Please cease doing so. You post what is in the sources and nothing else, or you will be blocked.'' Ironholds (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ironholds (talk) 17:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Quite frankly having gone through two years of your contributions I can't find anything that isn't either a minor typo fix or, as it is the vast majority of the time, editorialising. This is unacceptable, particularly about living persons. Ironholds (talk) 17:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I apologise for the changes I made that were not typo changes (which I thought were acceptable). I will not "editorialize" again.
 * Yes, because all previous warnings persuaded you to change your ways, which is why there are so few of them-oh, wait. Do you actually understand why what you did is a problem, or is this simply "I apologise for $badthings and promise $goodthings"? Ironholds (talk) 16:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

There are changes I wish to make - the Glasgow Hillhead constituency 1983 results are incorrect. The majority for Roy Jenkins is 344 and not the >1000 listed. Reference is http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=T63gRgopFG0&feature=endscreen Part 15 of the 1983 BBC news coverage at 4:02 I do understand why some (or most) of my previous changes are not acceptable. Upon further research it looks like the original 1983 broadcast on the BBC was wrong. However I would appreciate my editing rights to be reinstated. Thanks.