Jump to content

User talk:OnlyJustTheFacts: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 19: Line 19:


AGAIN, SUPPORTED BY FACTS and CITED BY LEGAL CASE NUMBERS
AGAIN, SUPPORTED BY FACTS and CITED BY LEGAL CASE NUMBERS
:No, bringing a claim into court does not equate to a reference - the case might be thrown out. Only a conviction would quantify a complaint. Oh, and Tony blocked you for 31 hours - I was going to block you indefinitely. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 01:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:00, 25 January 2009

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Fade In has been reverted.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b (links: http://kidsisinhollywood.blogspot.com/2008/07/fade-in-magazines-allegedly-non-paying.html, http://payupfadeout.blogspot.com/, http://rockyworldstudios.blogspot.com/2008/12/fade-in-magazine.html). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced content warning

Please do not upload unsourced material onto wikipedia, as you did here [1]. Wikipedia articles must be properly sourced. Dayewalker (talk) 00:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I have reported you as a vandal for recreating this page as an attack page. Please revert your edit, and take your discussion to the talk page. Dayewalker (talk) 00:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's the facts and supported by Case Numbers.

It's a violation of our neutral point of view and biographies of living persons guidelines. Do not revert the article again, or you will be blocked. Tony Fox (arf!) 00:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AGAIN, SUPPORTED BY FACTS and CITED BY LEGAL CASE NUMBERS

No, bringing a claim into court does not equate to a reference - the case might be thrown out. Only a conviction would quantify a complaint. Oh, and Tony blocked you for 31 hours - I was going to block you indefinitely. LessHeard vanU (talk) 01:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]