User talk:I Wake Up Screaming

Leave a message...(but don't scream it)

Welcome

Hi, noted your interest in several pages where I am also interested. Welcome to Wikipedia. dinghy (talk) 12:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I Wake Up Screaming (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

greenleft.org.au

Hi there, I noticed your edit to The Last Supper (1994 film). Could you expand a little on why this website is not a reliable source? Also, when you're removing content like that, could you drop a line on the article talkpages so that others know why you've done it? Thanks, --Beloved Freak 09:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comment, the website does not meet the standards of [1]. It is neither fact checked/ peer reviewed and holds extremist/fringe theories. Wikipedia should be looking for more scholarly references if you will, to create an atmosphere of credibility that is sorely lacking from us. I Wake Up Screaming (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the explanation.--Beloved Freak 12:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

I refer to your recent edits in Energy policy of Australia, Energy in Victoria, and List of wind farms in Victoria. I appreciate that you are an enthusiastic newcomer, as of 26 May 2008, but would ask you please to be more careful with your edits and not be too bold. In particular, if you wish to remove sourced material from an article, please consider providing an extensive reason, whether in the edit summary, or on the Talk page -- one or two words (such as "propaganda") will not generally suffice. If you wish to remove unsourced material, please challenge it first by adding a ^{[citation needed]} tag to alert other editors to the problem; it may be that someone else will have the needed citation. Johnfos (talk) 02:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Talk:Energy in Victoria -- Johnfos (talk) 02:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions from Carbon Capture and Storage

Hi Wakeup,
Just noticed your deletion of a complete section of the above page. Noticed you just dismissed the Greenpeace report as a source and didn't engage in any discussion as to why it was not an acceptable source or cite any references to show it is in error. Could I suggest that I don't think this is the way to go and ask that you consider whether if your sourced contributions were treated this way you would feel it was appropriate. Would you like to consider reinstating, perhaps adding the tag about a section only having one source, or justifying your deletion on the talk page. Cheers dinghy (talk) 14:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a blatant copyright violation of the original document. I Wake Up Screaming (talk) 03:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. What is a copyright violation of what document?--Another-sailor (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of Prester John (talk • contribs • block log • creation log). As a blocked or banned user you are not entitled to edit Wikipedia. All of your edits have been reverted.

Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Wikipedia:Appealing a block.

The above template says... "All of your edits have been reverted." But there are many edits by this sock which have not been reverted... Johnfos (talk) 00:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Merbabu and I have done what we can to revert Screaming's edits. Carbon fertilization is a new article which Screaming started, so perhaps an Admin would be good enough to delete this. Johnfos (talk) 05:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]