User talk:Wildcatno2
Voretus is correct this is not an appropriate external link[edit]
I've given the reasons why the link is inappropriate on the article talk page. We should keep the discussion there so all editors interested in the page can see it. -- Siobhan Hansa 17:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Reverting[edit]
Hi Wildcatno2. Please note that constantly reverting other editors is not considered appropriate on Wikipedia. If editors disagree with you, especially when several editors disagree with you, you need to develop consensus on the article talk page rather than simply restoring your link. We have a three revert rule to ensure a single editor cannot keep their preferred content by engaging in this type of editing. In brief, you may not revert the same page yourself more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. Doing so will lead to you being blocked from editing. (Note: This rule is no an open invitation to revert 3 times - when an edit you make is contested, you should consider using the talk page rather than reverting again). Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 17:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Siobhan Hansa[edit]
I have taken the Issue to the article talk page. I suggest till we don't find a way to integrate some of the very rare quotes and find a better article which explains the problem in a better manner, I suggest we should let the link stay. Thank you for your kind comments.
Warning[edit]
Please read WP:3RR before you revert any more edits to Carl Jung. Please could you also take up the conversation on the talk pages about the links you keep adding. It is pretty clear to several experienced editors that they are outside guidelines and if you keep adding them you will, I am afraid, get blocked for edit warring. Go to the article talk page and try to convince people there. --BozMo talk 19:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
blocked[edit]
This account has been indef blocked as a spam only vandal (and 6RR after warnings). --BozMo talk 20:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)