User talk:Fashion Consulting

September 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Saks Fifth Avenue has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. miquonranger03 (talk) 02:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Saks Fifth Avenue constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 02:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Saks Fifth Avenue. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Pinkadelica (talk) 02:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the Remembering those who have served ... details to come - Remembering Kevin Haynes text you added. I (and evidently two other people) have no idea what that refers to, but it doesn't belong in the article and it appears unconstructive. I've changed it back yet again and I suggest you stop adding it back or at the very least, explain your edits in the edit summary. Pinkadelica (talk) 02:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, you are asking me about an edit that I reverted nearly 3 weeks ago. Why are you only talking to me now, rather than on the day that I reverted and warned you. Besides that, the edit you made (that I reverted) changed the articles content so that it did not adhere to a neutral point of view. That is why I reverted you, I think. Since then, I have made more than 4000 edits, so I do not have any real recollection of making that reversion. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 06:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Fashion Consulting, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

There is a page about the verifiability policy that explains the policy in greater detail, and another that offers tips on the proper ways of citing sources. If you are stuck and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Good Damon 06:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Saks Fifth Avenue has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Shirulashem (talk) 16:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Saks Fifth Avenue. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --DreamsAreMadeOf (talk) 05:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Saks Fifth Avenue. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

blocked[edit]

Blocked as a vandal account. Academic Challenger (talk) 06:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey... dont understand about the block... what was the vandalism as you claim... i have been and continue to be a stock holder and history of the company should be recorded correctly... nothing malicious, illegal, or otherwise controversial... only the truth of history about the company and their actions...

you might want to change history, but it is what it is...

Let me know...