User talk:Themetalgod

Welcome!

Hello, Themetalgod, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 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! Ponce de Leon 02:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. --W.marsh 03:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for 24 hours for violating 3RR on Roger Clemens. In addition, edits like these are rather disturbing. We are writing an encyclopedia here. Wikipedia is not a chat room. Punctuation, grammar, spelling, they all matter. When readers come to Wikipedia they expect professionally-written articles. Take a look around at all of the other articles; they're written in proper formal English, not netspeak. Thank you for understanding. --Cyde↔Weys 03:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wilt Chamberlain‎

Undid your Wilt Chamberlain‎ edit for being too point-of-view. You also unjustifiably removed a relevant factoid, which I have restored. Don't thank me, cheers. --Downwards 03:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did the same. I agree with your point of view, but I don't get to put mine in Wikipedia either. Love and peace,--BillFlis 20:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You keep adding the same POV material. So you got it off another website, it's still POV, it's just their POV. Stop adding it, it reads fine like it was. Also, concerning Wilt's and Jordan's career scoring averages, yes, most sources round to tenths so they're both listed as 30.1. However, if you're going to compare them head to head, you're entitled to compute them a little more accurately, and hundredths of a point is enough to show the minuscule lead of Jordan. Please discuss things on the Discussion page before making any more changes of this type. They are only going to get reverted, and it won't be by me.--BillFlis 20:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When you write "He was basketball's unstoppable force, the most awesome offensive force the game has ever seen and argubly basketball's greatest player...", that is called "point of view", somebody's opinion. It's fine for a fan site, or even the NBA's site, or even a book, but it's not what goes into an encyclopedia, which is based on facts. That is what I objected to. As to 30.06, if you divide WC's total points 31,419 by his games played 1045, you get 30.0617. Depending on how you round it off, you get 30.1 (NBA's usual way) or 30.06 (only done for purposes of argument, to compare with MJ). If you do the same thing for MJ, you divide 32,292 by 1072, you get 30.124; rounding that gets you 30.1 or 30.12. MJ's 30.12 is a hair above WC's 30.06. They do the same thing in baseball: two guys are listed as hitting .350, but A actually hit .35001 and B hit .34999; A wins, it's not a tie.--BillFlis 11:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Wilt .jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Wilt .jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Kaz2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kaz2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Wilt_2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Wilt_2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Thomas Jefferson has been reverted, as it introduced negative or controversial biographical material without providing a reliable source for this information. Wikipedia requires that all such material be sourced to address the issue of libel. Thank you. RainbowOfLight ^Talk 05:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Thomas Jefferson constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Thomas Jefferson. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not clear whether your are actively vandalizing, or if you are simply making changes unwisely. Please pause a moment. sinneed (talk) 05:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Thomas Jefferson. sinneed (talk) 05:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Jefferson

1st, I am uncertain why you are unhappy with me. The only edit of yours I killed was one that damaged the header of the article and left a large red error message at the top. I apologize if my remark offended you. sinneed (talk) 07:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"I leave that to you"... No, but thank you. Remember to add citations. Avoid putting in conclusions... let the reader draw them. Also, remember to sign your talk page items with 4 "~". I hope you will reconsider, review the requirements for edits, and resume work on the TJ article after you are ready. Finally, everyone who agrees with you is not your friend, everyone who disagrees with you is not your enemy. All the best. sinneed (talk) 07:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also note that there is EXTENSIVE discussion of that section on the talk page, and you have not contributed. It seems to be mostly squabbling (as your diatribe on my talk page) by multiple sides of an argument. The key is to avoid all that by presenting only information from reliable sources. Then the squabble can be limited to how to use them. Much simpler. sinneed (talk) 07:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, glad to hear that I haven't been offensive. To clarify though, I am not an admin. I am a rather active and outspoken editor. On TJ's article, I don't see the bias you are speaking of (that only means I don't see it, not that it isn't there). He is not listed as a Christian, and I don't know (in my very limited studies) many churches that would accept him as one. He did, clearly, have a strong interest in spirituality, as you pointed out (deep study, rewrite of text). As I read the section, it seems clear to me that he was not, and is not presented as, a Christian. Like some persons who follow Judaism or Islam, he felt Jesus was a wise teacher, whose teachings were badly misconstrued, rather than God, the Son of God, or the Messiah. Rather than flagging the article at once, I would encourage you to join the discussion on the Talk:Thomas Jefferson page. I found it quite interesting.

A note about strategy. If you do decide to flag the article, you might check out the wp:sandbox and place your flag there to be sure it works. Then, I note that you often use a very informal style of writing... no signature...few capitalizations. While this is certainly fine, it won't build credibility for your arguments, and you will be seeking to convince other editors that your views should prevail over those already in place. You will absolutely need to go into the discussion and explain (with references) why you believe the existing content is unbalanced, in order to succeed. All the best, and sorry for being so longwinded, I hope it helps. I am going to add a HUGE welcome banner thing, with many useful links. This is not to indicate I think you are a newbie, but it is the best way to FIND the guidelines and tools that I know of, I use it as a reference. :) sinneed (talk) 18:58, 17 November 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. If you can't type the tilde character, you should 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) 17:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference template

Hello, Themetalgod! Links! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! sinneed (talk) 18:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Edits to Thomas Jefferson

I note that you wish to make edits to this article and all of your attempts have been reverted by various editors. I strongly recommend that you use the talk page of the article to discuss your proposed changes with others before proceeding. Wikipedia has a rule about a single editor making more than three reverts to an article within one 24 hour period, and I note that you are at that mark, or possibly have surpassed it, already. Please discuss your proposed edits on the talk page of the article before editing further, or you will risk being blocked. Thanks. Risker (talk) 21:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 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 Albert Einstein, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Alvestrand (talk) 04:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]