User talk:Libertyinfo

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to water fluoridation controversy. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. · jersyko talk 17:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I invite anyone to view the discussion page of water fluoridation controversy and see for themselves who has been continuously making POV deletions and revisions to other editor's work without consensus since the article was originally created.

Friendly reminder

Just a note, but some of your recent comments have been a little but incivil towards other editors on Wikipedia. I know sometimes that editing can get hot, but it's important to remember to assume good faith on the part of other users — genuine Wikipedians are here because they enjoy working on this project, not because of any ulterior motives. It's important to remember this, and to treat everyone with respect and good faith, in order to provide a healthy working environment. Cheer, and happy editing. --Haemo 01:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

You need to tone down the rhetoric and make your personal biases less self-evident in your content edits, or you will be blocked for disruption and violation of our WP:NPOV policy. You have been doing this for a long time, to the detriment of the encyclopaedia, and no further aggression on your part will be tolerated. Guy (Help!) 14:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How am I being "aggressive" simply by pointing out that one person with an apparent bias is unilaterally controlling the content of an article and refuses to allow anyone else's opinion or contributions? Feel free to review the talk page of water fluoridation controversy.

At this point you have precisely two options: start listening to other people, or find somewhere else to argue. I will not say this again. Your style of debate is aggressive, disruptive and focuses on what you assert is bias on the part of another editor. You appear to misperceive your own bias as neutrality; you are following a pattern we describe as tendentious editing, you are attacking your opponents instead of making constructive attempts to reach compromise, and you are being disruptive. Guy (Help!) 17:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, enough. I have blocked you as an unrepentant POV warrior, for personal attacks, persistent incivility, tendentious editing, disruption and basically being in the wrong place. Sorry, Wikipedia is not Usenet. Your inability to stick to issues of content rather than attacking editors with an opposing view means that your participation is actively harmful to the consensus-building process. Guy (Help!) 22:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]