User talk:Imin2
January 2008
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Samson in popular culture, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Samson in popular culture was changed by Imin2 (c) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-01-12T10:38:27+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 10:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Note deletion discussion for Richard Warshak
[edit]Discussion is here. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 01:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
July 2021
[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Parental alienation, you may be blocked from editing. Notfrompedro (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- My editing is not disruptive not promotional. I hold a doctorate and work for a university. I do not have promotional or advertising intentions.
The article refers to some organisations opposing parental alienation - even to a three-hour session of one organisation with a focus elsewhere. Inclusion of such information is not relevant. Pointing out a major organisation dealing with parental alienation alone is definitely needed. Why do you think the opposite?
The article is biased. An example is above or the reference to the three-hour session. Another is writing about belief system. Such an expression carries the idea that parental alienation is a question of belief only. Why do you want to keep such statements in the article?
Why would you have the right to block me? :-)