User talk:Airguy

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. The bulk of your edits to Lorenzo's article indicate you have not only information not available in the references but a personal POV that is influencing your edits. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 23:39, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Frank Lorenzo. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. HiDrNick! 00:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. HiDrNick! 00:12, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your possible use of multiple accounts

An editor has complained at WP:ANI#puppets at Frank Lorenzo that one person may be editing the Frank Lorenzo article using several different accounts: Airguy, Duggin, DavidDaws, Casatkes, Aaaa222ppp and Wikilore. This may violate WP:SOCK. You may add your own comment in the ANI discussion if you wish. I removed the extra sock templates at the top of this page, since they are wrong-way-around. You may have useful information to contribute to the Frank Lorenzo article, but you are expected to abide by consensus. Please work to persuade others on the talk page, and don't continue to revert the article without getting support from others. This article was previously discussed at WP:COIN#Archive 32#Possible COI on biography of Frank Lorenzo. EdJohnston (talk) 22:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Today you have continued to remove material at Frank Lorenzo. Please join the discussion at Talk:Frank Lorenzo and explain your thinking. EdJohnston (talk) 16:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are continuing to remove material, and you will not discuss. You may be blocked if you continue. EdJohnston (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I notice I have been named above in error since I don't know Airguy. I have been doing research on the airline industry after deregulation. Lorenzo has seemed to play a big role in this evolution, both negatively and positively, which is why I have incorporated some of my findings on Continental and have been looking at the contentious Eastern case as well. My changes have no bearing on Airguy's opinion. -DavidDaws —Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidDaws (talk • contribs) 03:01, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]