User talk:Craigcobbcreativitypractitioner
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Craig Cobb, 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, 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 a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I noticed that you recently posted to Wikipedia talk:Etiquette. This is the wrong place to raise this concern. If you feel that you have a grievance, please see the references provided by NawlinWiki above. These will point you to the appropriate resolution mechanisms. -- TerryE (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Craigcobbcreativitypractitioner, if you read my user page and specifically the last section then you might guess that my views on life and tolerance are just about as far from yours as possible, though I accept your right to hold your views. The content of your last post to my user page has no interest to me, and my advice was limited to your recourse if you felt that the current content is unfair. I read your additions: the content was poor; the grammar and layout was bad; and there was a lot of unverifiable original research. Read the policies and guidelines that you were referred to. Suggested specific verifiable changes where reputable sources exist or the article fails to conform to WP:BLP guidelines. -- TerryE (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Thx TerryE for your response. In terms of bad grammar and bad sourcing: please cite for me the proof that I have ever been an enrolled member in any "Neo Nazi" org, and a few of the current (2008-2010) published dictionaries that both do and do not give definitions for the term "Neo Nazi". Was my photo which I legally uploaded and made available to Wiki Commons "bad grammar" or just too interesting or charismatic to make the grade in you and your fellows' exacting edits? Also, shouldn't it be stated that the Creativity religion has been ruled by federal judge Lynn Adelman (a Jew!) to be a valid and legal faith in the U.S., albeit one which (as Buddhism) does not believe in a God? That way, if any 11 to 17 year olds are interested in joining, they will know the Creativity God of DNA is on their side--as well,that the United States government is out to help them when they get pounded in their public schools! I'll get over to my friend Alex Linder's Wikipedia site soon and be sure Goyfire and The Aryan Alternative get mentions. I will keep the sentences simple, to avoid your extreme English skills editing. Gosh, I betcha your word skills are even higher than Alex Linder's! Truly amazing, Sir. Signed CraigcobbcreativitypractitionerCraigcobbcreativitypractitioner (talk) 21:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
ANI
[edit]Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Stonemason89 (talk) 23:52, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.