Due to personal commitments, I'll be away for some time. I hate to keep harping on it but if Highway Cello & co feels the need to vandalise, edit, picking on and alter even my user talk to your liking, policy or not - I suggest taking a break from wikipedia and actually getting a life.
If everything stays the same when I get back, this matter is dropped forever. Digisouth14 15:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are making edits to Wikipedia which are breaking the Manual of Stylehouse style which users are supposed to follow. Please stop. These are the agreed rules which everyone abides by. Continuous changing of content in articles to break agreed-upon MoS rules, when you have been asked to stop, is often seen as vandalism. Constant vandalism may lead to you being blocked from editing Wikipedia. HighwayReturn to Oz... 00:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Afterword - Please reread what does vandalism mean. Reference : WP:VAND Just because you do not like another's contribution means it's vandalism. Digisouth14 10:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. HighwayReturn to Oz... 00:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's NPOV rule by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. HighwayReturn to Oz... 00:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but you are breaching the "rules" we have for editting, by what you're adding. The way you talk about Strawberry Panic! contains bits of your personal opinion, which we don't allow in articles. Please read WP:MoS. If you re-implement the POV containing prose again, I will have to report you. HighwayReturn to Oz... 00:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Afterword - I'd advise you to go back and read WP:NPOV and WP:MOS again. Again It doesn't mean just because you do not like another editor's writing means their's is POV. Engaging in revert wars by editing within seconds is also counter-productive. Digisouth14 11:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't edit summaries, you need a special privilege to do so that only about 6 editors hold.
I have done nothing against but follow the steps noted down in policy.
The POV is the fact that text contains your opinions, rather than you wanting to use your own version.
I am not homophobic, I don't know, or more to the point care, about your age, sex, religion, nationality or sexual preference, at all. HighwayReturn to Oz... 00:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Digisouth14, please stop making large edits to Strawberry Panic! article if possible. A lot of people have worked on the article and we'd all prefer that you discuss such large changes in its talk page instead. For one, if you went to the game's website, you would notice that it's actually 'Lulim' and not 'Le Lim' although I personally think the latter is more fitting, but what I think is unimportant and irrelevant in the face of official information. I understand that you are interested in contributing to the article, so please discuss major changes in the talk page, thank you. --Remy Suen 00:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked you for disruption. You are invited to contribute in a constructive manner as soon as the block expires. --Pilotguy(roger that) 01:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No editor or group of editors has "special rights" over any other editor with regards to an article (see WP:OWN). In fact, all editors should assume good faith with regard to any edit made to an article. Articles are written based on the consensus agreement of the editors working on the article along with Wikipedia policies such as WP:NPOV, WP:OR, WP:VERIFY, WP:CITE and WP:RS. These are, of course, not the only policies or guidelines that may apply to a particular article (see WP:MOS and WP:MOS-JP). If a dispute between two or more editors occurs about the wording of a section, then the dispute should be resolved on the article's talk page. If, however, the dispute cannot be resolved, then follow the recommendations on dispute resolution page. Editors that engage in a revert war can be subject to a temporary ban (see WP:3RR) by an administrator. --TheFarix (Talk) 01:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you showing me the guidelines and policys of Wikipedia TheFarix. I really appreciate it as I'm a new user to wikipedia
and do not yet know how things work. My apologies for not following some of the guidelines as I felt some of the remarks were made unfairly but I know now that this kind of self-delation is not allowed. Digisouth14 15:00, 23 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. HighwayReturn to Oz... 11:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To HighwayCello, Please do not engage in personal attacks. Refer to WP:NPA or try to start an edit war. If an admin has determined according to guidelines that I'm violating the rules of wikipedia, he/she will see fit to revoke my privilages. Digisouth14 15:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
