User talk:Speer320

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Speer320, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for List of acquisitions by Apple Inc.. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Gary King (talk) 00:50, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting important link

I noticed that you deleted the link I placed in the Verizon Wireless company profile. You didn't list any reason, you just deleted it. I have as much right to add content as you do. If you have a problem with the link, then discuse it in the discussion area. If not, then please leave it alone. You do not own Wiki, so you can't bully others around. Other carrier profile list their company sized, compared to other world carriers. So why can't Verizon be part of this? If you have a problem, then come talk about it. But deleting a valid link is wrong.

70.157.54.190 (talk) 09:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, he did the same thing on the AT&T Corp Page. Some people love to "revise" your content without discusssion. I agree when you say there are a few users who think they "own" wiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.104.64.193 (talk) 06:57, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

koin

KOIN HD is now on directv please dont delete my edit on this again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skihoodoo (talk • contribs) 23:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George Hussein Onyango Obama

Why did you remove that info? It is true and it is related to the article. Political censorship? I hope it is not for that. Wikipedia is apolitical. --Dejudicibus (talk) 12:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cause The article you used as a reference was not neutral If you could find a more well know source add it back Speer320 (talk) 21:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Volt

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Volt. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. See the talk page as your reversion is incorrect. Red Harvest (talk) 22:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Radio

Actually, Virgin ended at 4pm Friday afternoon. Absolute launches at 7.45am on Monday. The station is in a limbo period at the moment and they are using the tagline "From V to A".

Eugenespeed (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thermonuclear Power Definition

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Nuclear Energy. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Would you mind explaining why you undid my contribution about the definition of Nuclear Energy and/or Power in The Nuclear Energy article? WFPMWFPM (talk) 19:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cause You had a Talk Signature on it and it was not formated correctly Speer320 (talk) 22:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make a contribution to an article without having a talk signature? And aren't you supposed to help innocents like me that are naively trying to improve the definitions in an article? WFPMWFPM (talk) 23:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just Don't Add the Talk page Stuff Speer320 (talk) 23:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, I have to use the talk page to contribute to an article, is that right? WFPMWFPM (talk) 00:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No not at all You Can Contribute but just don't Put the Talk page Signature Like "Speer320 (talk) 00:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)" Just add it with out Speer320 (talk) 00:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You would have been better off just helping the newbie sign his work properly instead of deleting it. Deleting newbie's work without really explaining things to them causes them to lose interest in editing Wikipedia and it makes you look rather hostile rather than helping people. You have a whole history of reverting changes without even giving a reason. I think it's time to stop now.Kgrr (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pickens Plan

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Pickens Plan. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Do not remove whole sections because you think they have POV and are "not encyclopedic". I was in the middle of working on that section. Instead, you could help in finding some material that supports why CNG cars are a much better idea than cars that are far more fuel efficient than internal combustion engines and burn no fossil fuels. Do it again, and I will work on getting you banned.Kgrr (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been looking at your history of merely deleting various things all morning long. I have two observations for you

1) Please understand what POV means. It's ok to add a reference to an article that has a point of view. All articles do. Wikipedia seeks a neutral point of view by including all relevant POVs, not based on what one person thinks. In a sense, when you delete people's material that was properly referenced, you are introducing your own POV. Instead, may I suggest that you recommend the writer to balance the POV with differing viewpoints.
2) I do agree with many of your reverts. However, you should add a reason as to why you are reverting changes that were made.

Kgrr (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Cellular South. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 16:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]