Mediapioneer
|
Minor edits edit
I just wanted to point out that you are marking all of your edits as "minor" edits. I don't believe they are all "minor" edits and so probably shouldn't be marked as "minor" edits. Are you aware that you are marking all of your edits at all articles as Minor edits? There is a box in the edit window which you probably have checked off next to wording reading: "This is a minor edit." Here is more information. Happy editing! Bus stop (talk) 03:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Your edits to Joshua DuBois certainly are pejorative, and violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Don't insert them or any similar content again, or you'll be blocked. Bishonen | talk 19:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC).
Recent edits to Joshua DuBois edit
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. While the content of your edit may be true, I have removed it because it may violate WP:BLP. Thank you! Technopat (talk) 01:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Blocked edit
Since you ignored my explicit warning and reinserted the same BLP violations in Joshua DuBois, I have blocked you from editing for 31 hours. We are strict about biographies. It's not a question of your information being "untruthful or libelous", but of tone and emphasis. Statements about what the subject has not done don't belong; putting in text about what degrees DuBois doesn't have, with emotive wording, too ("reputable"), is contrary to the principle of neutral editing, and sneering remarks about "embracing the religious left elites" etc are worse. If you do it again, or anything like it, you'll get a longer block, so I really suggest you read the policy that I've linked to, and take it to heart. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 21:02, 18 June 2013 (UTC).
TO BISHONEN FROM MEDIA PIONEER The living person referenced in this fluff biased posting has clearly implied that he has a degree in theology or divinity from a reputable university (such as Princeton). R U disagreeing that Princeton is not "reputable"? So a statement about what this person has "Not"done by failing to having a degree in theology, divinity Bible History, Bible Archaeology, Hebrew or Koinea Greek (which are all basic minimum studies required to be a reputable minister or rabbi)is paramount to demonstrating to the readers of Wiki that this living person has educational qualifications commensurate with a politician but not of a minister. Finally, the exact QUOTE which was fully and properly reference about this persons "Tweet" had been published for quiet a while and demonstrates the tone and motives of the living person and his politically correct agenda, which if you would study the subject NOT a part of his African Methodist-Episcopal background. Nor is it that of his father. Your block was intentionally malicious and most likely you are a biased friend, associate or Democrat trying to re-write history more favorable to your political interests. Shame on you! Mediapioneer (talk) 12:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
- You don't seem very receptive to my advice, so I won't repeat myself. Just keep in mind if you edit the article Joshua Dubois disruptively again, you'll get a longer block. I should mention that you can complain about an administrator action at the ANI noticeboard. Mind you, I'm not saying it would be wise in this case, but it's a possibility. Post at the bottom of the page, start a new section, and give it a header using the ==…== code. Technical mistakes aren't important, anyway, but do note that the more politely (and the more concisely) you post there, the better chance you have of being taken seriously by the reviewing administrators. Your post above, for example, wouldn't get you far. (I see you enriched it further in the version on my page.) Bishonen | talk 15:09, 20 June 2013 (UTC).
July 2014 edit
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories, you may be blocked from editing. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:06, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- Obama Sr and Ann Dunham were divorced in 1964. However in 1954, Obama Sr. had married Kezia Aoko[Ref 22 from other Wiki post) in a tribal ceremony. They had two children, Malik (a.k.a. Roy) and Auma, during the early years
- Obama birth certificate genuine"]{{Dead link|date=May 2011}}. Associated Press. October 31, 2008){{Dead link|date=May 2011}}</ref> No such suit has resulted in the grant of any relief to the
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:19, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add defamatory content, as you did at Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories. --Orange Mike | Talk 05:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, you are going to have to back up the claim you are making with a proper citation, not just a link to a web page that doesn't mention the topic. Please do not try to put the statement back (especially not in the lead of the article) until you have a citation. Thanks, MartinPoulter (talk) 15:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)