User talk:Numberoneconti

Dork
I reverted the information you typed for Dork. The information is not historically accurate, and if it is, you must prove it by posting the proper citation of where your information may be found. According to a reliable source, an etymology dictionary, this link, dork is properly explained, thereby proving your edit to be vandalism. Your type of Vandalism, is called "sneaky vandalism", which may be researched here is on the grounds for blocking by administrators if you edit with false information. Please post back on my talk page.


 * I appologize for the accusation. Please forgive me on all grounds. If you would like to add it to the article, create a new heading, such as "possible other meanings" or somehting like that. I'll add the reference to wikipedia. If you could get more information that would be great, because if we only put in what the wiktionary has then whats the point of having it in two places. Anyways, thank you so much for editting here on wikipedia. Slasher600 02:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Donald Rumsfield
Nice edit on that article (moving paragraphs to more appropriate sections). Be sure to try to add a few comments to the "edit summary" when you submit an edit. It's not technically required, but it's a good practice. It makes it much easier for counter-vandalism folks to make quick judgements on potential vandalism or good edits. OhNo itsJamie Talk 04:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)