User talk:Ridgedoga

The God Who Wasn't There
Hi. Whether the film is propaganda is a matter of opinion, and not fact. If a reliable source opines that it lapses into propaganda at times, then it is acceptable to mention this, but only if that opinion is attributed as such. Describing it as propaganda in a matter-of-fact manner in the Intro gives the appearance that Wikipedia is describing it a such, which is unacceptable. Please do not revert that information. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 22:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * "You are wrong" In what way am I wrong? Let's discuss it on that article's Talk Page, okay? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 23:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Stop hand.svg|30px|left|Warning]]

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at The God Who Wasn't There. 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.--Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 06:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view, No Original Research or 3RR policies by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, or citing yourself as a "source", rather than discussing the dispute on the article's Talk Page, as you did to The God Who Wasn't There, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Nightscream (talk) 09:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael Turner (Virginia politician)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Michael Turner (Virginia politician), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * this article about a losing political candidate fails WP:POLITICIAN, and appears to qualify for deletion under WP:ONEEVENT.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Rklear (talk) 04:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Nomination of Craig Weber for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Craig Weber, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Craig Weber until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Deconstructhis (talk) 15:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)