User talk:SteveMcP

Dream touch-ups

Thanks for doing those! LilDice 21:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

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 John Anthony Walker 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. Martial BACQUET 03:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to John Geoghan, you will be blocked from editing. Hirolovesswords 23:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Columbia articles

Please refrain from importing your point of view to articles about Columbia University. Your comments would be better suited to the more freewheeling, Columbia-specific WikiCU. Cjs2111 16:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Last NPOV Warning

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Spiesr 16:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. gadfium 03:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Ronald DeFeo, Jr.

I reverted your edit from here, not because you clarified the name/model of a weapon, but because of all the other unsourced changes that were made with it, such as

"extremely loud blast of the .35 caliber Marlin rifle, a powerful hunting weapon that is very commonly used to hunt deer in New York State" and

" which would have been of little value, since the .35 caliber rifle cartridge used operates at high supersonic velocity, well in excess of 2,000fps, and is therefore impossible to make inaudible."

The problem with both of those changes is that they are not referenced in anyway and without a reference, can only be viewed as original commentary. You offer nothing to support your statement that this gun is commonly used to hunt in New York, the operating velocity of the gun, including specific measurement and your statement that it is impossible make inaudible. This all may or may not be true, but because there is no supporting source for that content, there is no way to verify. Something that you "know" from personal knowledge or experience still must have a verifiable and independent reliable source or it appears to be original research. That you simply returned the identical content with no supporting sourcing and described it the edit summary as "There is only one Marlin .35 lever action rifle, which is the Model 336" is misleading in that you have chosen not to mention the more copious information that you neglected to mention. Please do not return this content without supporting documentation. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Last warning before longer block

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Maldives, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Cuban Five

Do you want to give some indication how this is relevant? The Nobel Prize mention is relevant because it's a group of Nobel Prize winners who got together to sign something. Any other bio details belong on the respective linked articles - unless the relevance (WP:WEIGHT) is unambiguously demonstrated by secondary sources. PS AFAIK he was drafted as a 17-yr-old, so maybe you should think about how fair you're being to the guy. Rd232 ^talk 10:54, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)