User talk:Aoso0ck

General practitioner

Is there a reason why you can't discuss your additions on the talk page? It might stop other editors from reverting them if you justified them. Verbal chat 16:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in light of your tendency to edit-war without discussion I am going to require you to now use edit summaries explaining what you are doing. I will revert any edit made from now on that does not have a reasonable summary. I also strongly recommend that you discuss your changes on article talkpages with other editors. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits are being discussed at WP:ANI

Hello, Aoso0ck. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Aoso0ck editing restriction. EdJohnston (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 2008

Thank you for using an edit summary to explain why you wish to delete content in Licensure. However, another editor did not see your content removal as constructive, and it has been reverted. If you disagree with the interpretation of sources, please discuss why you think the text is inaccurate on the article talkpage and provide sources of your own, rather than just deleting the text. Thank you. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are still editing without discussing your changes with other editors. This has been reverted and I've requested other admins to act on this. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Licensure, you will be blocked from editing. You need to justify removing large sections of text like this with a more informative discussion on the talk page. Verbal chat 17:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Parabolic antenna, you will be blocked from editing. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 17:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Licensure jurisdictions

Licensure is permission or legal authority unexclusive to organisational membership. Federal and/or local jurisdiction never regulate the membership aspect of professional licensure. Aoso0ck (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So what changes do you want made to the article, and could you provide the citations you mentioned too please, thanks. Verbal chat 17:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Licensure or legal authority to carry on a business or learned trade, additional ("Other uses of licensure", the qualification of the term not limited exclusively to the few, highly salaried professionals). Unnecessary, prevelent prejudise among licensed highly salaried vs typical commoners seems unapplicable towards usual licensure. pervasion of medical exclusivity pervading licensure unnessary to a common licensee. Aoso0ck (talk) 19:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Electronic signature. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Tim Vickers (talk) 15:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. You have been told before that reverting to your version with no discussion is not acceptable. This is your only warning that this is still the case. NJGW (talk) 05:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Specialty (medicine) has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Shell ^babelfish 06:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Family medicine constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to remove content. Thank you. Shell ^babelfish 06:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Shell ^babelfish 06:08, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]