User talk:Radioist

Mediation Case
Here's what I would suggest. Re-apply the article on HardRadio.com and see how it plays out. If he directly reverts that, then you'll have a case. So far all he's edited out in relation to you is something about the Copyright Royalty Board. If it doesn't work, I hope to help mediate and we'll get it taken care of. DeluxNate (talk) 14:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC) U-T-C

1-28-09 Per your recommendation, I made edits to the Internet Radio article and the HardRadio article. SlubGlub has taken it upon himself to reverse again the revisions I posted. Again, this person acts out as if he has another agenda and something against the trail blazed by HardRadio in the new medium. He is continuing to *censor through exclusion* the legacy of HardRadio within the internet radio history.

2-5-09 Once again, this SlubGlub person has reversed my substantially shorter edits to the Internet Radio history section. He is continuing to *censor through exclusion* the legacy of HardRadio within the internet radio history.

2-5-09 Yet again, this SlubGlub character is editing the internet radio history entries for HardRadio, which are significantly more brief than before. Shall I forward this longstanding and continuing problem to the arbitration level or even the legal department? Please advise.

Sign your talk page/discussion posts
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you!-- KelvinHO Wiknerd ( talk ) 03:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Threat of Legal Action in HardRadio discussion
Am I correct to interpret your comments at Talk:HardRadio as a threat of legal action? If yes, then would you care to retract the threat? If it is not in fact a threat of legal action, then could you clarify what you mean by "serious and probably legal review"? Thanks. SlubGlub (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Toddst1 (talk) 05:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 05:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Warning
You are a disruptive single-purpose account with no involvement here other than to promote something where you apparently have a conflict of interest. This type of activity is not in accordance with our mission and policies. Please desist or you may be blocked from editing. You are welcome to edit other topics, but further promotion of HardRadio is not acceptable, I'm afraid. Guy (Help!) 10:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, I see you're a member of the 'Wikipedia Ultra Secret Inner Inner Cabal'. Do you have a secret handshake and something like a treehouse for secret meetings, without any grrls? I suppose you also had Double Secret Probation too. Your censorship and exclusion of facts further degrades the credibility of the "Wikipedia" which has already been exposed in the press on hundreds of occasions. Even your founder states to not use Wikipedia as a factual based reference. Maybe you can all get together in your super-secret club and change the name to 'WikiEnquirer'.