User talk:Teaker1s

Your edit to MG Rover Group

Your recent edit to MG Rover Group was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 11:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might have some POV / cite-able issues there

It must be said that the biggest problem with Phoenix Consortium was the lack of new models and increasing reliance on old technology apart from the rover 75 everything else was rebranded old models with flashy paint/wheels and dubious build quality-doomed from the start. Also to palm a £3000 pound Tata off as a city rover, the quality was so terrible that some rover dealers wouldn't sell them!!!

everything on Wikipedia must be citable from another source, please take a look @ WP:OR -- Tawker 20:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Weston-super-Mare, you will be blocked from editing. Simple Bob (talk) 07:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 10:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find it irritating that wiki is supposedly human editable, yet when I put a popular when know issue such as weston super mare has more drug rehabilitation clinics per capita than anywhere else in the uk-banned. If you want to paint everything as rosy and great when it quite obviously is not when you are a local-so be it, but at least call the site wiki-lies.

Teaker1s (talk) 17:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism within articles is very welcome on Wikipedia as it helps present a balanced view. However, as with all contributions they must written from a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV) and be taken from a reliable source (see WP:REF). Your posts were childish and badly written, they were not sourced and your actions in mass-reversion when your contributions were removed meant that admins (I'm not one) were left with no option but to ban you. If you want to contribute, especially if you want to work to provide a balance by digging out (well-sourced and well written) dirt on the subjects of articles then why not register a new account. If you do then any of us in the Somerset Wikiproject will be happy to help you. --Simple Bob (talk) 17:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be quite honnest, I do not like the censorship of wiki-rose tinted glasses at best and plain sterile. Therefore to save the annoyance of the editing and censorship- I will use the company server and just register a domain for three pounds a year I can do as I like with it.