User talk:Eminence Grise

March 2007[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, your recent edits to Rasputin (song) have been reverted as they could be seen to be defamatory or potentially libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Indon (reply) — 20:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Greenpeace, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Indon (reply) — 20:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove warnings from your user page. It is considered vandalism. The warnings are there to provide a record of your edit style. MKoltnow 19:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry.

AfD nomination of Smallest number paradox[edit]

An editor has nominated Smallest number paradox, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smallest number paradox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 16:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote:

Please allow me to fix this, just have to reword some stuff and it makes sense again. Eminence Grise 18:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Eminence Grise[reply]

After you do that, there's still another problem. You yourself seem to have said this is original research. Are you unaware that original research is forbidden on Wikipedia, so that in itself is considered grounds for deletion? Michael Hardy 01:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh go die in a hole, crazy geek. You have no friends, get a damn life.

I'm afraid you're being less than cogent. I did not create the policy against original research, and even if I do nothing about it, many others will. Michael Hardy 21:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Warren Bardsley (Awesome), you will be blocked from editing. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 22:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should have been on my last warning already, you moronic nerds. Are you telling me that my genius superlinking of articles has been forgotten? Don't be an imbecile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eminence Grise (talk • contribs)

If you'd really like to be blocked from editing I'm sure it can be arranged, but since it had been a while ago I thought one more chance might be the nice thing to do. Now, please consider contributing constructively because I don't know if you'll get another free pass. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 21:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]