User talk:Robinthe boy wonder

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam);
 * and you must always:
 * 1) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Accounts used solely for blatant self-promotion may be blocked indefinitely without further warning.

For more details, please read the Conflict of Interest guideline. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  19:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Burt Ward article
Mr. Ward,

If you disagree with some of the content on the article about you, please bring it up on the talk page rather than simply deleting the content. Thanks. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  20:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  23:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  05:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Look
Please, just lay off the Burt Ward article for a little bit. I'm trying to incorporate your changes as well as a summary of the controversy in a neutral manner. This isn't a press release, and you can't expect the article to just completely take your side (there's no way the description of the newspaper's activities as a "smear" is going to stand). That said, I certainly want it to demonstrate your viewpoint as well. Please work with me on this so that we can have a fair article. If you keep deleting everything negative and rewriting it completely from your side, however, you're just going to end up being banned from here and then you won't have any way of making your thoughts known. As I've said repeatedly, please limit your edits to Talk:Burt Ward and hopefully we can come up with an acceptable compromise. You're also welcome to message me directly my leaving a note at User talk:Chowbok. Thanks! &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  06:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, please take a look at the article now. I've tried to be fair to both sides. If you feel that there are important points being left out, I would, again, strongly urge you to bring them up on the article's or my talk pages rather than editing the article. I promise you won't be ignored. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  06:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Sigh...
This is your last warning. The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  19:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)