User talk:ZINLAW

Hello, I thank you for your edits, but please see this link for information on Wikipedia's "no original research policy. I thank you for your contributions, but please keep into consideration what type of information is encyclopedic, and which statements need to be supported by outside sources. AdamBiswanger1 01:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed sections of the text which I felt violated our original research policy. Feel free to add them back to the text if you are able to prove that they are not simply your viewpoint. AdamBiswanger1 01:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Zinlaw-- I have removed your commentary on Sonnet 141 and moved it to Sonnet 141. Please tinker with the information there so it does not violate any of our policies and guidelines-- namely, ensuring that the information is not original research.  If you would like to respond, please write a message here. AdamBiswanger1 01:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Zinlaw-- please see the Wikipedia article regarding Spam. I see that the book you added has an author with a conspicuously similar name.  If this is not you, I apologize, but if it is I must remind you that Wikipedia is not a place to publicize oneself. AdamBiswanger1 02:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear ZINLAW, I apologize that I did not reply to you earlier, but I don't check my e-mail regularly... it is customary to edit the "user talk" page to leave a message. I agree with everything you are saying.  If you would like to add info on these interpretations, feel free, but add citations after every fact.  This can be done by placing the the citation AdamBiswanger1 04:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Once again, please read the publicizing oneself policy regarding your recent addition to Shakespeare's sonnets. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)