User talk:Worldnewsjunkie

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Emufarmers^(T/C) 05:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to significantly change the sexual orientation piece on Anderson Cooper, please explain your changes in an edit summary or on the talk page. --Emufarmers^(T/C) 05:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anderson Cooper

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
Mkdw ^talk 06:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are direct citations at the bottom of the section that support the articles speculation into his sexual orientation. Further removal of content from that article will be considered vandalism. Mkdw ^talk 07:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you're posted it on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Hopefully that will sort things out and good luck. I know sexual orientation can be a difficult subject to work around. Thanks for support Wikipedia and its policies. Mkdw ^talk 07:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legal threats

Your recent edits could give other users the impression that you may consider legal or other 'off-wiki' action against them. Please note that this is strongly discouraged under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats are often blocked indefinitely until their legal case is withdrawn or resolved. Please try to keep a cool head and work positively with other editors. Thanks. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 09:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ingrid Rivera

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you've been adding your signature to some of your article contributions. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thanks for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. --ShakataGaNai 20:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

This is your only warning.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Kristen Stewart, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ward3001 (talk) 02:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per your WP:ANI report

That message is not a threat, its our stock BLP4im (first and only) warning. Per your actual edit here I see no source cited. The BLP warning was therefore justified, and since theres no source for that particularly controversial edit the 4im seems appropriate. Please remember to source controversial edits per WP:CITE, and to follow WP:BLP when adding potentially libel and offensive information. You did not exactly need to bring this to AN/I, the message you left on the users talk page was more then enough. I don't see any real administrative action being taken when the warning was justified. Please be more careful in the future. Have a nice day, Matty (talk) 04:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS, you don't have to be worried about being blocked because (hopefully) you understood what went wrong and you can not do it in the future :) Matty (talk) 04:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Your editing and threat

Hello Ward3001 I know that in demand celebrity bios are constantly defaced. If you check my history you might see the battles I endured within the Wiki organization trying to enforce the guidelines for it. The item I posted was relevant due to the graphic and NEWS reports about the issue. Agreed, I didn´t reference them at the time. But to threat me to be banned is a long call. I think this should be included. Reliable sources:

Huffington Post TMZ (photos and videos) and most recently Ciak and ANSA (Italian News Agencies)

If you think this is not relevant for a public figure we might discuss it. Worldnewsjunkie (talk) 04:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The item I posted was relevant due to the graphic and NEWS reports about the issue": I never said that anything is irrelevant.

"Agreed, I didn´t reference them at the time": And that is the core of the problem. Wikipedia has a zero tolerance policy for adding unsourced or poorly sourced, defamatory information about a living person. It is a legal liability that could result in a lawsuit against Wikipedia. You clearly and unquivocally violated that policy. And providing a vague mention of a source on this talk page is not the proper way to cite a source. See WP:CITE. What you interpreted as "threat me to be banned" was a standard warning template for violating a very serious policy. And the warning still stands. If you add unsourced, defamatory information again, you will be blocked from editing. Read WP:BLP and WP:V before you describe something as a "long call". Ward3001 (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]