User talk:Axfield

Welcome Axfield!

Greetings Axfield! Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! I invite you to participate in Wikipedia's Adopt-a-User program in which experienced users help out the new one's through one-on-one questions. If your interested in this, please leave me a message on my talk page. Here are some other pages that you might find helpful:

Introduction
Tutorial

Manual of Style
How to edit a page

Remember, if you want to be part of Adopt-A-User, or have any questions, just leave me a message on my talk page. I'll get back to you as soon as possible. Happy editing!

Weasel Words

This edit isn't acceptable. If you can't figure out why than do what you should've done in the first place: read WP:WEASEL. Ditto with pretty much all of your other edits to the article (which I'm reverting since you have now been reverted by two users). Perhaps, given that you're partial towards the WWE, you should consider taking an edit break from the article; because terms such as "smear campaign" are clear violations of Wikipedia policies on neutrality.--74.166.60.24 (talk) 02:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear - I tried to find as many pages that I could so that you could contribute productively,

Your edit here is a vio of WP:REF (you didn't actually cite anything), Wikipedia:RS#Primary.2C_secondary.2C_and_tertiary_sources (since you're faux-citation was referencing a primary source) and WP:OR (because the 9/16th claim and the claim about the clothing was not confirmed by a secondary source and therefore were presumably based on analysis by you).--74.166.60.24 (talk) 02:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Parents Television Council, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 01:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. PhilKnight (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Parents Television Council. 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 a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 20:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to your email

You are not blocked. On 23 May 2009 PhilKnight (talk · contribs) blocked you for 48 hours. That is your only block. Toddst1 (talk) 12:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The articles you have been editing are protected, which I guess could be the source of your confusion. PhilKnight (talk) 13:48, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]