User talk:Chazz88/Archive1

PLEASE NOTE: This is an archive. DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE. If you wish to give me a message please go to my talk page. (User talk:Chazz88)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Chazz88, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Gator (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to George W. Bush

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. We always welcome new users who want to contribute to our encyclopedia. A recent edit to the article George W. Bush was reverted; as you may have noticed, the editor who did so, Redwolf24, said in his edit summary "rv anyone who uses an edit summary like "please leave"". Edit summaries like that are considered very rude and incivil. You may want to read up on our civility and no personal attacks policies, both of which are considered very important in our community. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c, +m ] 09:42, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Burden of proof

The burden of proof that the Bush deliberately joined the National Guard to avoid the Vietnam War is upon you. Putting a controversial tag on the article with no discussion from you on the Bush talk page is not the best way to prove your comments so I encourage you to start up a discussion there. Thanks.--MONGO 09:57, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the disambig page, and that's fine, but there already was a link to the Henry Hill (artist) at the top of the Henry Hill (mobster) article and I don't usually see too many disambiguation pages for only two distinct articles...so I reverted it...I see you changed it back so I'll leave that alone. Also, please don't put controversial tags on the article pages...they go on the talk pages...and they were already there.--MONGO 11:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking user talk pages

The blanking of user talk pages by either the user or by another editor is generally considered unacceptable, especially if the purpose of the blanking is to hide or remove criticism directed at the user. Please refrain from blanking your user talk page. Creating an archive is an acceptable alternative.--chris.lawson 21:57, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

George W. Bush edits

Please gain consensus for your additions before adding any text to the intro. It has been the subject of countless edit and revert wars and there should be strong consensus for any additions. Also, please be aware of the three revert rule. Continuing to re-add the same text could lead to be temporarily blocked. Thanks. Carbonite | Talk 12:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Locke Cole RFA

For what it's worth, I know it's inappropriate to use admin tools in a dispute that you are involved with. (E.g. - I would not protect an article I was in a content dispute on; I would not block a user I was in a dispute with; etc). I will never use admin tools in a dispute I'm involved in. If you have any other concerns, feel free to leave me a note on my talk page and I'll be happy to try and address them. —Locke Cole • t • c 14:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AMA

All right - let's see what advocacy looks like then. Do as you propose. Benjamin Gatti 16:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]