User talk:Timon1902

Welcome!

Hello, Timon1902, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ian.thomson (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Secret Gospel of Mark. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

February 2012

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:Ian.thomson. Also, Wikipedia cites references. If you bothered to actually read the Secret Gospel of Mark article, multiple points from prof. Bart Ehrman's Lost Christianities are cited in support of it. Your accusation of dishonesty is inappropriate, as is your attitude of ownership over material posted here, as was your personal commentary in the article. If you believe you have more reliable sources counter to Ehrman, go to the talk page and properly cite them, and work with other editors in incorporating those views (if appropriate and neutral) into the article. Wikipedia is not a battleground, do not come to my talk page if you're looking for a fight. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

October 2017

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to William V. Harris‎, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. When you remove material three times within the course of the day and offer no explanation, it starts to look like your edits are with disruptive intent. Further, please remember that the three-revert rule prohibits users from making more than three reverts to a page within a 24-hour period. If you make a fourth revert within the time frame, your account may be blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 23:31, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to William V. Harris, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:57, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

January 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Gwilym Ellis Lane Owen ‎, you may be blocked from editing. Gamaliel (talk) 20:10, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

• Gamaliel, this User is making a habit of removing sexual harassment cases. That is not cool and warrants an indefinite block.