User talk:76.19.197.84: Difference between revisions
Rivertorch (talk | contribs) →March 2009: new section |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] }}}Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}. Your edits appear to constitute [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> [[User:CardinalDan|CardinalDan]] ([[User talk:CardinalDan|talk]]) 20:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC) |
{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] }}}Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}. Your edits appear to constitute [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> [[User:CardinalDan|CardinalDan]] ([[User talk:CardinalDan|talk]]) 20:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC) |
||
My edits did not appear to constitute vandalism under any known definition of the term, including Wikipedia's. Nor were they unconstructive. I merely asked for source attribution. This "reversion" is not fixing my error; it is preserving those of others. Labeling me an Internet "vandal" without any supporting evidence easily consitutes libel under United States law. I'll weigh my options. |
|||
== March 2009 == |
== March 2009 == |
||
Revision as of 18:54, 28 March 2009
January 2008
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. CardinalDan (talk) 20:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
My edits did not appear to constitute vandalism under any known definition of the term, including Wikipedia's. Nor were they unconstructive. I merely asked for source attribution. This "reversion" is not fixing my error; it is preserving those of others. Labeling me an Internet "vandal" without any supporting evidence easily consitutes libel under United States law. I'll weigh my options.
March 2009
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Geralt of Rivia. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you. Rivertorch (talk) 13:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)