User talk:Trippleact

Please feel free to discuss with me on this page; I should answer soon after a post. Thank You.

POV

Your edits at Minister for Men demonstrate a non-neutral point of view. Your reintroduction of poorly sourced material (typepad.co.uk and blogs.com are both blogs, and not suitable as references), and your deletion of prior warnings from your talk page, and the similarity of your user name to Tripple132 (talk · contribs) all indicate that you may not be willing to follow Wikipedia guidelines. Failure to do so may result in your being blocked from editing. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you WikiDan. I understand your concerns. I believe the reason why i have sourced material from the same reference is in connection to the fact that the text is in relation to the specified reference allready mentioned. I am taking steps to sort this out and the other issues which you have mentioned.

Thank you again.

Weasel words

This addition: "A number of campaigners draw attention to the fact that every year in the UK, 35, 000 men are diagnosed with prostate cancer and more than 10, 000 men die from the disease.[16] They equally draw attention to the fact that men are 60% more likely to develop the disease than women and are 70% more likely to die from cancer than women.[17]" while containing real verifiable facts, does NOT verify that anyone has called for a Minister of Men specifically to deal with these issues. You are turning this article into a soapbox for your own issues; please don't. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link farming

Clearly, you are very interested in the cause of men's and fathers' rights. But you cannot use Wikipedia as a linkfarm to link every site on that topic to the Minister for Men article. Please stop introducing links that are irrelevant to the topic of the Minister for Men. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

I found this comment on the Minister for Men ePetitions page. I submit that you and Tripple132 (talk · contribs) are one in the same person, and that you have created this page to further your own political agenda. As such, this constitutes a conflict of interest. You should refrain from any further edits to the page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise. There appears to be a bit of a muddle here. It is evident that there appears to be a "Conflict of Interest" in connection to; and now withstanding the" Tripple132 (talk · contribs). however, indeed; I can gracefully assure you that I; as an account holder am not detracting Wikipedias' context. It seems to be apparent that a individual has brought up into Genesis; the subsequent creation (Upon in question) an account with the similar particulars as you have rightly stated. However, I cannot recall being presented this certain data and this therefore leads me to so rightly assume that there is another entity taken hold of; and now wherefore, of similarities upon into consequential connection(s).

Thank you for informing me of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trippleact (talk • contribs)

Um, yeah, whatever. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Minister for Men

An editor has nominated Minister for Men, an article which you have created or worked on, 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/Minister for Men and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns 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. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Minister for Men appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. Consensus has been reached by multiple editors on this article. Given your documented conflict of interest in the matter, further edits of this article by you are discouraged. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:21, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I'm not really sure what you are wanting of me. In your comments on my talk page you never ask a question or give any hint of what kind of help you are wanting from me. Sorry. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of talk page contents

You are welcome to remove content from your talk page in order to maintain order. It is not advisable to remove content in order to hide the reasonable comments that others have made about your contributions. This prevents other editors from reaching consensus. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While not advised, it is expressly not prohibited either. If Trippleact wants to remove things from his talk page, for whatever reason, he is free to do so. If you edit war with him to reinsert it, it is you (WikiDan61) who will end up in trouble.

Point taken. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That said, Trippleact's calling of the warning "vandalism" in his edit summary is inappropriate. Vandalim on Wikipedia means specific things. Lobbing the term around against those who give out good-faith warnings is rather incivil. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppetry

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Trippleact. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]