.Encyclopedia-account

See the messages I left on what is obviously your previous account. Just because someone doesn't like Zeitgeist is not a reason to delete the article about them. If you're not here to build a neutral encyclopedia, but merely crusade against Zeitgeist fans, you are just as unwelcome as those who would crusade for Zeitgeist fans. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. Go somewhere and start a blog about your feelings of hatred and anger for Zeitgeist.. but Wikipedia is not designed for that and you have an audience of perhaps one, yourself. My own personal feeling is that Zeitgeist is funny. Comical and kind of a cultural template. But that is not really anything that anyone cares about, so I usually do not bring it up. You have made your points now multiple times, so best you leave the area of Zeitgeist before someone gets annoyed and blocks you for multiple infractions of the guidelines. Earl King Jr. (talk) 13:18, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Don't really get you Earl, you say you find zeitgeist "funny" and something "not really anything that anyone cares about" but you seem precious about the idea of zeitgeist being deleted? Do you know what a contradiction is?

Ian, zeitgeist isn't a subject it should be in an article listed with NWO conspiracy scams, but its own article? I completely disagree..Encyclopedia-account (talk) 03:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Spamming your opinion on talk pages only serves to waste everyone's time. Wikipedia's mission is to characterize topics from a Neutral Point Of View (NPOV), not to delete topics you don't like. See Wikipedia:Five pillars —68.7.95.95 (talk) 01:12, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

ANI discussion

I have opened an ANI discussion about you.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 04:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

• Reading over the above discussion, you've made your opinion sufficiently clear on Talk:Zeitgeist (film series) and I can tell you there is exactly zero chance that the article is going to be 1) deleted, or 2) merged onto a list of conspiracy theories. The Reception section of the article captures some of your sentiments well enough, and if you can provide reliable sources to improve it, great. If not, please stop disrupting the talk page and move on. Consider this a final warning.

Also, it is abundantly clear you have used both this account and Encyclopedia-viewer (talk · contribs) to edit. However, Encyclopedia-viewer has been inactive for three weeks now, and I assume you have stopped using it. Please restrict yourself to use of this account moving forward. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 07:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Are you here to build an encyclopedia? If not, please refrain from commenting on the talk pages of WIkipedia articles. If you believe the article should be deleted, please submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Article talk pages are to discuss article improvements, not to repeatedly offer your opinion. Gamaliel (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 11:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC)