User talk:ExpandYourMind

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Book of Revelation has been reverted, as it appears to introduce incorrect information. Please do not intentionally add incorrect information to articles; use the sandbox for testing. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Chasingsol ^(talk) 04:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Book of Revelation constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. ZX81 ^talk 04:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, ExpandYourMind, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Chasingsol ^(talk) 05:04, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Book of Revelation. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to blocking of editing privileges. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. E Wing (talk) 05:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Book of Revelation. 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. Hello, I know you feel strongly about your edit, but when different people object, you should at least take it to the talk page instead of inserting it again and again. Assertions like yours can also be challenged as being your personal opinion or original research and thus not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Loves Macs (talk) 05:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User talk:ZX81, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Chasingsol ^(talk) 05:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Jackfork (talk) 05:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, one last chance. You've already blown your last warning twice over; please don't do so again or I'll be forced to block you. If you feel strongly about changing the page discuss it on the talk page; otherwise, keep your peace. Thank you, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :D} 05:43, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are three things wrong here. Firstly, Wikipedia isn't meant to be an open forum for anything; it is meant to be an encyclopedia where content is added through rational, neutral discussion which is participated in by the community at large. Secondly, not every fringe theory is allowed free reign. Things need to be sourced, they need to be notable; not just every viewpoint gets a voice. Finally, if you want to include your opinion, you have to make sure it is neutral, sourced, and you have to gain the consensus of other editors. After all, it is a group project when you look at it. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :D} 06:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your intelligence and attempt to clarify the information, but you have to understand that making logical deductions should be left to the reader to do in their mind only. If everybody changed information to what adhered to their point-of-view then we'd have chaos. If the statements are sourced, let them be; if you feel it is incorrect, raise the issue on the talk page. However, do not edit war over the change, or else nobody will listen. Thanks, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :D} 01:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 06:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]