User talk:FurnaceOfMonkl

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 15:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove warnings from your talk page or replace them with offensive content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. If you continue to remove or vandalize warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 15:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They said that wikipedia was going to be like this but i didn't belive it until i saw it with my own eyes--FurnaceOfMonkl 15:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that Wikipedia is an inhospitable place for those who would damage and vandalize others' hard work. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 15:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and POV pushers, too. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 15:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to remind you of the 3 Revert rule, as outlined at WP:3RR. Reverting a page more than 3 times in a 24 hour period will result in a block in the name of stopping revert wars. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 15:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! Tom Harrison ^Talk 15:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I've reverted your edits to Responsibility for the september 11, 2001 attacks. Although it is very easy to get carried away with your own point of view, Wikipedia must have a global approach. Although all of us know Jews didn't do it, it is what some people believe and must remain in the article to remain balanced. I hope you understand. Archer7 15:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"many of whom are closely tied to DOC party chairperson Howard Dean, as well as liberal policy group Moveon.org." We can't just say stuff without citing it to a reliable source. I expect you know this. As satisfying for you as it may be to make these edits, you need to stop now. It is becoming disruptive. Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, "many of whom are closely tied..." is the same kind of innuendo-based remark the conspiracists love so well. We don't need any more of that rhetoric, from either side. Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• they told me you people would throw a regular alphabet soup of wiki "laws" at me, and biy were they right--FurnaceOfMonkl 16:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People are citing Wikipedia policy at you because you're in flagrant violation of many of Wikipedia's policies on Neutral Point of View, as per my warning below. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 17:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's NPOV policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Furthermore, reinserting the same commentary multiple times may cause you to violate the three-revert rule, which can lead to a block. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 17:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary and your personal analysis of an article into Wikipedia articles, as you did to September 11, 2001 attacks. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 21:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC's motto is "nation shall speak peace unto nation". Its mission is "to educate, inform and entertain". Whether you (or anyone else) personally feel it is currently failing to meet its stated mission is an entirely different thing.

Such discussion of whether it meets its mission (within the UK) belongs is a sensible discussion of the BBC's direction and remit within the UK, which a number of members are trying to work on. AFAICT outside the UK, the BBC's mission can unofficially be summarised as "to make as much money as possible recycling content made for primarily for the UK audience".

Since you appear to be outside the UK, your "problem" probably lies with BBC News. However, this article already has a significant commentary on alleged bias.pit-yacker 23:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hipocrite is now accusing me of being a sockpuppet on the SPAM page -- I assume he thinks that I am a sock of you. I removed it as a personal attack, and warned him. Thought you would want to know. Morton devonshire 05:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Kevin_b_er 08:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Dear FurnaceOfMonkl: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

• Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Community Portal
• Frequently Asked Questions
• How to edit a page
• How to revert to a previous version of a page
• Tutorial
• Copyrights
• Shortcuts

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

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.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Stifle (talk) 21:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given your interest in conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, I thought you might be interested in one that was up for review. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs deemed inappropriate by Clear Channel following the September 11, 2001 attacks I urge you to carefully examine Wikipedia's policies and rules, and then carefully consider whether you have an opinion on the matter. Your friend. Morton Devonshire^Yo

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 14:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've removed an image from your userspace, weather tetxtual or not that is litteraly a attack against a person. MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 15:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 15:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]