User talk:Wednesday13 rulez

An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Ln of x (talk · contribs · logs).
Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

Welcome!

Hello, Wednesday13 rulez, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Joshua Issac (talk) 17:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009[edit]

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Abi Branning, even if you intend to fix them later. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. This also applies to edits made to Lorna Fitzgerald. Sky83 (talk) 18:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I feel they are factually true

What you added was commentary. It is non notable original research. Your edits are your own personal opinion and do not belong in the articles here. I don't want to scare you away since I realise you are new here, but please do not add the text back as it will be immediately reverted. Thank you. Sky83 (talk) 18:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But it reflects opinion and shud be included

Please do not continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, as you did with this edit to Lorna Fitzgerald. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Kingpin13 (talk) 18:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thats not very nice. I'm only trying to help and u keep rverting my edits bare times

Please start to take this seriously. Two editors have now told you that what you are doing here, while possibly in good faith, is not acceptable. Sky83 (talk) 18:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I appreciate your efforts, but please try not to add points of view into articles. Can I suggest you read Wikipedia:Introduction? Cheers! - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Abi Branning, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This also applies to edits made to Lorna Fitzgerald Sky83 (talk) 19:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand why u r saying all of this

Have a read here, you may understand more then. Sky83 (talk) 19:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have read it and I still dont see the problem. Shes a lovely girl and a great actress and this should be included in the article

You should probably read WP:V too then. Thanks - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

but its true

You didn't read it did you? From the page: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". Cheers - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ive read it again and feel that my comments about Lorna Fitzgerald and Abi Branning are verifiable

Then please provide a reference. - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, every EE episode shes been in

WHY HAVE I BEEN BLOCKED

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wednesday13 rulez (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why have i been blocked

Decline reason:

See the block reason below. Additions to our articles must be well referenced, avoid personal opinions, and be verifiable. You ignored several warnings and requests to stop. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:30, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Account blocked[edit]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated addition of personal opinion to articles (see WP:NPOV and WP:NOR). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]