User talk:NTN67

July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cptnono (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Tea Party movement. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Bart133 t c @ 22:01, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Continuing to revert won;t get you anywhere. This has been discusse din great detail on multiple pages. If you want, see the talk page and restart it. If you continue to revert you will simply see yourself in a position where editors are seeking your block.Cptnono (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Cptnono (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you are, but your use of the word "vandalism" doesn't match the definition listed on the Terms of Use, or the help description of "vandalism" for Wikipedia. In fact, the Term of Use expressly state that a contrary opinion or further elaboration are not vandalism. I have not expressed an opinion, and I have referenced links to all the information that I've posted. There is nothing of vandalism in my edits. It is simply a statement of fact. Please indicate to me exactly to what you are referring when you are issuing your "final warning". For you to label my updates as vandalism is simply a form of censorship that is tantamount to seeking to maintain an inaccuracy on these Tea Party posts that serves an agenda that is suspect.NTN67 (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC) Also - I appreciated your introductory civil tone, but to quickly go from civil to nasty really was unnecessary. I have only just signed in to Wiki, and was trying to figure out how to add my reference. If it was posting multiple times, I was unaware of that. I simply was using my back button to get back to an original version of the entry - so that I could add the references. Your overly dramatic "final warning" was totally unnecessary. And your characterization of my edits as being "disruptive" was incorrect. There is no act of vandalism here - intentional or otherwise. Simply a learning curve.NTN67 (talk) 22:24, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for finally responding. In the future try to do that before reverting. See: Edit warring. This has been a contentious issue so your lack of understanding appeared to be disruptive and received a quick response. Apologies if I came across overly harsh.Cptnono (talk) 22:39, 17 July 2010 (UTC)