User talk:SoDisappointed

October 2010
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Ron Howard. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Wuh Wuz  Dat  16:07, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Ron Howard, you may be blocked from editing. Wuh Wuz  Dat  16:15, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Ron Howard. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Wuh Wuz  Dat  16:16, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Ron Howard, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Referencing for beginners for instructions. Thank you. Wuh Wuz  Dat  16:18, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

This is your only warning. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Ron Howard, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. RadioFan (talk) 16:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note to admins: please don't block, the user has filed a request at requests for assistance, and these edits would appear to be in good faith.

Welcome
Hello, SoDisappointed, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 16:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Your request
 Tide  rolls  16:42, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome
In my opinion the warnings given above, although no doubt intended in good faith, are mistaken. It is true that repeatedly making the same edits in the face of opposition without being prepared to discuss them ("edit warring") is considered unacceptable. However, it seems to me that you were making good faith attempts to improve the article, and have now show willingness to seek help. Any problems seems to have been due to inexperience with Wikipedia's ways, rather than malice, and I don't think calling your edits "vandalism" was appropriate. Please feel free to remove the warning messages. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:16, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Ron Howard, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Peter Karlsen (talk) 18:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address 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. --SineBot (talk) 18:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

"small minded people"
Dude. I am gay and I think you are way, way off base here. Please, please read this link, and this one to understand why your edits were resisted. They had nothing to do with the fact that the issue was about a gay slur. Nothing. → ROUX   ₪  02:14, 2 November 2010 (UTC)