Hello, Duece22, 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! -- Infrogmation22:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop adding that the New Orleans population counts "will be met with criticism" and "will be seen as unstable and unreliable". This is blatantly POV. The article already says—twice—that the numbers are only unofficial estimates. I think that's plenty, and from the looks of the history page, I'm not the only one. If you can cite a source for your statement, that's a different matter. -Babomb01:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again, please stop adding this. I don't know why you're so adamant about this particular claim, but it's going to keep getting deleted unless you can cite a source for it. Wikipedia has a policy of No original research. -Babomb11:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep from adding excessive and unsourced statements. Your edit to the nickname "Hollywood South" is already stated later in the article, as is your edit to the population statement in the beginning. These introductory parts are meant to be a brief overview, with details later in the appropriate parts of the article. --Bobster68703:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure why you're so adamant about your edits to the article, but the population and Angelina/Brad information is already available later in the article. This introductory part shouldn't be too detailed. I am only deleting the information in the beginning to keep the article concise, as the article is already too long. I would like to delete this excess information, if you would allow me to do so. Doing this, I feel, helps the article to better meet wikipedia's standards. Thanks. --Bobster68717:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Concur. Please stop adding this content to the lead, it has been reverted a number of times already. Your edits further suggest that you are not familiar with Wiki markup (in particular the [[article|alt-name]] syntax). Please discuss your changes on Talk:Kobe Bryant first. Simishag23:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your "Reopening" section edits to Lafitte Projects, Calliope Projects, Magnolia Projects and related pages are repetitive, as the sections are almost identical across all of the pages. I'll assume good faith here but some might see this as vandalism. More importantly, since the content is duplicated rather than linked, it's unlikely to be updated in every place at once. A single article on reopening, linked in to each page, would be more appropriate. Simishag23:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in New Orleans, Louisiana. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -- ReyBrujo02:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. It appears you have not followed this policy at Dallas Mavericks. Please always follow our core policies. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Jmlk1709:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop edit-warring and participate in the article's Talk page. It's clear that your edits are contentious (and a violation of our policy regarding biographies of living persons). It's obvious that you are eager to participate in Wikipedia and you are knowledgeable about the topics to which you regularly contribute. Please work with us, learn, and abide by Wikipedia policies, particularly WP:NPOV and WP:V. --ElKevbo18:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
Deuce22, do you know how to use Talk pages? At the top of every article there is a tab labeled "discussion". If you click on it, you will be on that article's Talk page. That's where editors discuss proposed edits, issues, questions, and other matters related to the article.
Please begin using Talk pages! You were just blocked for violating the Three-revert rule but now that your block is over you've gone right back to making the same edits that got you blocked! I'm afraid that you're going to exhaust the patience of the Wikipedia community and end up banned if you don't begin cooperating with other editors. --ElKevbo02:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please stop inserting the same commentary repeatedly, and take the time to read over Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view again. Thank you. --Ytny (talk) 03:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —LOL17:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Please try to understand Wikipedia policies and practices such as are detailed in Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, and the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you are in dispute with other editors over what goes in an article, please try to enter into a discussion on the article talk page rather than repeated reverts. I have given you a two day block due to your continued problem edits despite attempts by several other editors to discuss with you. Please use your time out to review the linked policies. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation21:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. --waffle irontalk20:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that many of your edits have been justifiably reverted. There is a lot of guidance and information about editing, policy, and style in the links contained in the welcome message above. Please check them out - they are very helpful. - Special-T03:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to New Orleans, Louisiana. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Thank you. Sagredo15:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to New Orleans, Louisiana. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Please seek a consensus, or at least leave an edit summary, when you delete material. AlphaEta15:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Duece22. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to New Orleans, Louisiana. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Thank you. -Babomb 06:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced or original content to Wikipedia, as you did to Dallas Mavericks, you will be blocked from editing. —LOL 11:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
