User talk:Aussieicon91

February 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Matthew Hayden appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. Spitfire^Tally-ho! 11:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Matthew Hayden. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Please con't revert my edit again, instead, leave me a message regearding this at my talk page, providing reliable sources, then I may be inclined to revert my edit, thankyou Spitfire^Tally-ho! 11:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Hayden[edit]

leave me a message regearding this at my talk page, providing reliable sources to prove that Hayden is regarded in the way you say he is, cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 11:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but this is your point of view, please provide a source that backs you up, cheers, thankyou for dealing with this in a sensible manner, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 12:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've found a source for you, I can change the material to state that Langer, Ricky and other players have stated that Haycen is among the best batsmen ever, I'll use these source: 1 and this source: 2, please post me a message saying if you're happy with me editing the article in this way? cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 12:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, I'll post you a note once I've finished editing the article to see if you approve ;p, in the meantime, don't foget that all new converstion threads should go at the bottom of my talk page, cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 12:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you like it: 1? Sorry for the delay, I am a slow typer ;p Spitfire^Tally-ho! 12:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

or you cuold look at it here: [1], basiacally I just wrote the section: "Praise" Spitfire^Tally-ho! 12:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Matthew Hayden. 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. Mattinbgn\^talk 08:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note, I have no intentions of reverting further but you need to realise that you do not own the article and that Wikipedia is not a fansite. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 08:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Matthew Hayden. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. CIreland (talk) 09:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]