User talk:Kvanko

Editing in Campaign Material

Kvanko,

Thank you for your desire to contribute to Wikipedia! Please be mindful that Wikipedia entries are to remain neutral and use independent resources, not campaign materials from the candidates website. Thank you--Jnshimko (talk) 03:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. To help you in your further editing, I've included this link on Wikipedia:Reliable_sources to help you understand why your edits have been reverted. Thanks, --Jnshimko (talk) 03:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, sources from the campaign website does not consitute a third-party source. The other information deleted does not pertain to an actual entry for Wikipedia, or any other encyclopedic entity. Please refrain from including campaign propaganda in this entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnshimko (talk • contribs) 04:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Lauzen191.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Lauzen191.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Chris Lauzen‎

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Chris Lauzen. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 04:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR & Civility

Just letting you know, your constant edits on Chris Lauzen are in violation of WP:3RR. Please discuss changes on the talk page, and do not simply keep engaging in an edit war. Also, some of your edit summaries are quite uncivil, please be courteous to your fellow wikipedia editors. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 04:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

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 Chris Lauzen, 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: Chris Lauzen was changed by Kvanko (u) (t) deleting 13918 characters on 2008-01-24T04:52:33+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 04:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War

In response to your comment, this is not an "apparent" edit war. You are edit warring, please stop and discuss things on the talk page. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 04:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Chris Lauzen

Hello. I have noticed your edits to the Chris Lauzen article and suggest that you begin a discussion on the Talk page. I have been trying to improve the article and noticed that you have as well. In order to resolve the content dispute, the editors should come to a concensus on the Talk page (so we don't have constant edit warring). Also, please assume good faith of other editors (e.g., don't call them Oberweis campaign operatives). Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 04:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting that I can resolve the dispute. However, if you post your concerns on the Talk page and the editors of the Lauzen article come to a concensus, changes can be made. It certainly has more chance of resolving the dispute than constant reverting on the main page. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 05:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 04:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Chris Lauzen constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 04:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Chris Lauzen. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 05:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR

I have filed a formal edit warring complaint here. I'm notifying you so that you know what is going on. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 05:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PA

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User:Snowfire51. 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. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 05:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to your comments on User:Snowfire51: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 05:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop

Please stop leaving comments on my talk page. Your comments are CIVIL|uncivil and in violation of wikipedia's policy on personal attacks. Since you refuse to discuss the issues or behave yourself, your messages will be deleted. If you wish to discuss this matter, please do it on the talk page of the article. Snowfire51 (talk) 05:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. - PeaceNT (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Return To Edit Warring

Now that your block is lifted, please take advantage of the opportunity to discuss your edits on the talk page before returning to an edit war. Simply saying huge blocks of properly referenced text is WP:NPOV is not sufficient notice to make a mass deletion. Again I ask you, please discuss your changes to the Chris Lauzen page on the appropriate talk page. Snowfire51 (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]