User talk:Hippiehalfbrit

June 2014[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Kristine W has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Kristine W was changed by Hippiehalfbrit (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.950835 on 2014-06-06T02:52:06+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 02:52, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kristine W with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. BollyJeff | talk 02:56, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then Kristine will talk to Wikipedia about her privacy, that's not a problem. In the meantime, leave the birth date OFF. Hippiehalfbrit (talk) 17:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit carefully when you work for the subject of an article[edit]

Hello, Hippiehalfbrit. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Kristine W, you may have a conflict of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

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.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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. —C.Fred (talk) 02:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hippiehalfbrit, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi Hippiehalfbrit! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kristine W's birthdate[edit]

Can you explain precisely why you continue to remove her birthdate? Please don't try to convince me that she competed in the Miss America contest when she was 11 years old.

Bear in mind that Kristine Weitz's wishes and preferences have no bearing on the contents of a Wikipedia article when formulating your reply.—Kww(talk) 17:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

She doesn't want her birthday posted at all - which the day itself is incorrect in the first place, so not a reliable source from the get go. Can you explain why posting the age is so important to you? We will keep removing it because one, KRISTINE doesn't want it on there, and two, the resource that you're using is WRONG.

Kristine is actually in the process of having this entire page removed because she doesn't like the idea that anyone can come on here and post whatever they want. The information is haphazard and most of it is incorrect anyway. Hippiehalfbrit (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Whitburn is one of the most respected commentators in the field of popular music, so it's hard to see why he would be considered unreliable, especially when the dates that have been provided by other editors claiming to represent Kristine W have been so obviously false.—Kww(talk) 17:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Whitburn made a mistake, it happens all of the time. I AM TALKING TO KRISTINE RIGHT NOW and she wants this finished. If you keep putting INCORRECT information up about her, then you will be reported for privacy violations. I have worked for Kristine since 1989, and your source is incorrect. Please leave this OFF the page. Thank you. Hippiehalfbrit (talk) 17:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continually removing the data will simply result in the page being protected and your account being blocked from editing. Providing either a reliably sourced, credible alternate date or actual evidence that this one is wrong are your successful paths forward. Please bear in mind, as you have been told repetitively, that no one here cares about Kristine's wishes. Wikipedia is not an PR organ for musical artists.—Kww(talk) 17:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kristine doesn't have a problem talking directly to Wikipedia regarding privacy issues. Just leave the date off. Thanks.Hippiehalfbrit (talk) 17:55, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think she has a right to not have the date placed there. Besides it doesn't matter when she was born she's super fun and even super hotter, one can't put a number on someone like her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.8.103.136 (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014[edit]

Your recent editing history at Kristine W shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]