User talk:Lawline

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests‎. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Rehevkor ✉ 13:47, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also reverted your edit of the same section after receiving Rehevkor's warning above. Jonathanwallace (talk) 14:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

INDICATED ARTICLES REMOVED

You should not delete the discussion, you can request it is archived, but not deleted it. Consider this your second warning, continuing to vandalise as you have could result in you being blocked. Rehevkor ✉ 14:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LIBELOUS AND SLANDEROUS COMMENTS REMOVED FROM THE POSTING See Wikipedia:Libel

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Rehevkor ✉ 14:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ARTICLES DELETED AS NOT IMPORTANT, SO IRRELEVANT

Votermarch.org listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Votermarch.org. Since you had some involvement with the Votermarch.org redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). January ^(talk) 14:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SUGGEST DELETING REFERENCE, NOT REDIRECTING WWW.VOTERMARCH.ORG IS A WEBSITE ALREADY See http://www.votermarch.org