User talk:NuttyProSci-Fi3000

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. --TeaDrinker 18:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

An unfair message -NPSF3000
I recieved this message from you:

"Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. --TeaDrinker 18:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)"

I have only undone one persons change so far, and that was because it was a change on my own. I did say I was going to change it In the talk section in somthing called 'controversial' (the botom one of the 2, cant quite remember the name) but that has now been moved elsewhere (i dont know). The change I did was only due to substantial evidence to say that on fact that theory is debated in the scientific world. I did say if anyone has wants to revert it please read a 'creation' and 'journal of creation' from answers in genisis - which was in my post which has been moved (might my post be the reason?) - I believe evolution is wrong and only after condering aguments from both sides, if you believe it is right believe so, but please dont falsify wikipedia articles. NuttyProSci-Fi3000 18:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. Sorry for the harsh sound of the warning.  Of course, the best time for warnings is before a block is warrented.  The key is to make new users aware of the policy on the three revert rule before they have violated it.  As far as the content of your concern as to whether evolution is factual and/or broadly supposted, it is covered in the Evolution FAQ.  You can bring it up again on the talk page, if you wish (I did see your note there).  You may want to find scholarly sources which back up your claims (Answers in Genesis is not usually considered scholarly, but you can discuss that too on the article's talk page).  Thanks, --TeaDrinker 18:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

PS it seems that you have more vandalism in the walrus page:

"WalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrus. Walrus WILL RULE ALL YOU CANNOT STOP THEM THEY ARE THE WalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrusWalrus BOW TO THEIR POWer" NuttyProSci-Fi3000 18:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for spotting that. It looks like it was already reverted. --TeaDrinker 18:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Evolution
This edit was inappropriate, as was this one. It is dishonest to change the meaning of a sourced statement so that the sentence no longer matches what the reference states. Furthermore, if you wish to make such a claim, please provide a reference, preferably in the form of a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You modified a statement to say its opposite, while leaving in place the supporting source which made the prior claim. Please be more careful in the future. If you have evidence that there is significant scientific dissent regarding validity of evolution, please present it at Talk:Evolution (or, if you like, you may run it by me first). Given such strong support for the article's current position, you would likely need citations from a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Also, please note that you would need to demonstrate dissent specifically among biologists. While physicists may speculate on evolution, or biologists on quantum theory, neither is qualified to make assessments in areas removed from their training.


 * In addition, I removed your edit from Talk:Evolution/FAQ. It is not a forum for debate. I would be happy to address the questions you bring up, but you will certainly have to moderate your tone. In particular, a call for the death of Wikipedia editors is certainly grounds for an immediate and indefinite ban. I will not block you at this time (though another administrator might). If you are able to express yourself with more restraint, please ask me your questions on my talk page. — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmmm...perhaps I misunderstood the intent of your comment; I certainly am not following your logic or how you were demonstrating a logical fallacy. Perhaps you could rephrase it for me (and perhaps select a less extreme outcome, as well). I will look forward to helping you understand how Wikipedia works. I would like to be clear, though, that you are not required to go through me for edits or ideas. In particular, if you are dissatisfied with my responses, you are welcome to seek the opinion of others. Please let me know how I may assist you. — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)