User talk:Felix Natalo

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Felix Natalo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. 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. Here are a few other 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DanielRigal (talk) 23:38, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eliseo Soriano

Please stop removing reference to Soriano as an "international fugitive". He is listed on the Interpol website in a section labelled "Fugitives". Unless his circumstances change, he is a fugitive and will be described as such. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 04:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use known attack sites to uses as sources in articles as you did in Eliseo Soriano. - 4twenty42o (talk) 08:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which sites? — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 08:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.philippinewebawards.com see admin noticeboard

- 4twenty42o (talk) 08:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Hello, Felix Natalo. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Dave1185 (talk) 08:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eliseo Soriano

Please stop adding the awards section to the article. We have discussed this on the talk page and the consensus is that the awards are for the church, not the man. And the awards are not notable in general as well as lacking proper references. Please discuss the changes you wish to make on the article talk to avoid these problems. - 4twenty42o (talk) 23:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is not personal. I do NOT know the man, nor do I wish to. Please stop and please take note that you are in violation of 3RR. Thats the 3 revert rule. I am not going to report you and see you get blocked. I would like to work with you on this. But the information you are adding is simply wrong and will not be added unless you reach a consensus. - 4twenty42o (talk) 23:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Eliseo Soriano. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. DanielRigal (talk) 00:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Eliseo Soriano. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. DanielRigal (talk) 00:46, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for spam, advertising, or promotion. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Blueboy 96 01:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I am sorry you got blocked. I was trying to tell you to discuss your proposed changes on the article talk to avoid this. If you can get unblocked we would welcome your opinion still with regards to the article. - 4twenty42o (talk) 02:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]