User talk:King kong922

Welcome!

Hello, King kong922, 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:Questions, 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! --Slgrandson 06:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fame

When there are notes like  in articles saying to discuss before making changes, maybe that's what you should probably do in the future. Your changes to The Fame have been reverted because I do not think subgenres that only cover a portion of the album should be included in an album article; you need to discuss and gain consensus before adding those genres in again. POKERdance ^talk/contribs 15:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend that you to seek consensus for certain edits. Thank you. Pyrrhus16 17:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Fairfield, New South Wales, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Bidgee (talk) 06:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Fairfield, New South Wales. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Bidgee (talk) 10:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to Fairfield, New South Wales, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Bidgee (talk) 10:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smithfield, New South Wales

The information that you are adding to articles is already contained in the demographics/census information. It's usually easier to add a link to teh census information than reproduce it for these article. Also, measurements on climate made at Prospect, don't need to be included in every suburb article in teh nearby area. J Bar (talk) 02:53, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Smithfield, New South Wales, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Bidgee (talk) 06:06, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Sydney, you will be blocked from editing. Bidgee (talk) 14:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Smithfield, New South Wales, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This is the last warning you will get, next time you will be blocked. Bidgee (talk) 05:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. HamburgerRadio (talk) 12:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/King kong92 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Bidgee (talk) 03:13, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by MuZemike 20:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.