User talk:Neutrality911

Real Social Dynamics
Ah, I feel that I've just clicked and you are the user who wrote a bunch of stuff for this article (heh, of course should have realised from the history... bah, my lack of sleep is hurting...)? Could I please kindly suggest that you always edit with logged into this account? Would make things soo much easier than seeing all these rand IP addresses instead. Anyway, there are a few things that should be explained about what you wrote. If it is you as I believe I'll explain in more detail next time you log in. Best of luck. Mathmo Talk 13:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Please put new discussion at Articles for deletion/Real Social Dynamics (2nd nomination), and not an old archive. Thank you. -Royalguard11 (Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 00:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Real Social Dynamics, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article is a repost of either already posted material, or of material that was previously deleted in a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how Real Social Dynamics is different from all other articles, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Real Social Dynamics saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we ask you to follow these instructions. Mhking 04:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah that's me, "Neutrality911". I'm a new user to Wikipedia. Still learning the ropes. What I DO know, and maybe you guys have since forgotten this, is that the article I've posted is surely better than no page at all. It's actually a pretty good page compared to other pages, such as David DeAngelo, Mystery Method, Eckhart Tolle, Landmark, Anthony Robbins, etc. So please use what I've written as some clay to shape a new article. The vandalism that's going on with this site is off the hains. How is anything I've posted an advertisement? It's stating the company's background and philosophies in neutral terms, and I've even written a criticism section as well. I'm a fan of David DeAngelo, Mystery Method, and RSD, but the DYD and MM pages are NOT being held to same sourcing standards that RSD's is. Go check out their pages. Why are their sites not being attacked? My belief is that this is a commercial dispute, with one company attacking another's wiki. Either that, or their fans. 04:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it's all a conspiracy. Please use WP:DRV to discuss this instead of disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. JuJube 04:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)