User talk:LingBaiWu

No, we're not going to let you insert a passage in that article talking about the woman's nipples. So you can stop adding it. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 14:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its a fact, compare the three reference pictures in three different occasions with the same year. Strange Coincidence? LingBaiWu (talk)

It's not a "fact", it's original research by you. And as much fun as that research must've been, you can't put the results into Wikipedia. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 14:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you said can, so I can add it again?! LingBaiWu (talk) 14:20, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Typo. No you cannot. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 14:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So this is some kind of taboo topic? I'm not the first one who tried to mentioned it (see the article's talk page). However my talk response was reverted. Can you give me a suggestion how to write it nicely? Or cause this is a current living person we have to wait until she's dead to mention it? :-) LingBaiWu (talk) 14:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's original research. You can't add links to photographs and draw conclusions. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 14:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair enough. Is anyone of the following links enough for "research"? They all mention the same (frequent slips)

http://www.mahalo.com/Bai_Ling_Nipple_Slip

http://www.theinsider.com/news/266216_Bai_Ling_Nipple_Slip_Number_Six

http://www.egotastic.com/entertainment/celebrities/bai-ling/bai-ling-nipple-slip-number-six-002616 LingBaiWu (talk) 14:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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. Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 14:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only reverted twice so I didn't break any rule. Thanks for the reminder though. LingBaiWu (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did with this edit to Talk:Bai Ling, you will be blocked from editing. Damicatz (talk) 14:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Which part of the facts/refernces are vandalisation? I thoughts its OK and encouraged to give references in Wikipedia. Or do you think discussing about a part of a woman's breast is vandalism? LingBaiWu (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's original research. You can't add links to photographs, call them "references" (they're not) and draw conclusions. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 14:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it OK if I edit the talkpage again and refer to this ones? They all mention the same (frequent slips), or can I just add them to the page itself with references?:

http://www.mahalo.com/Bai_Ling_Nipple_Slip

http://www.theinsider.com/news/266216_Bai_Ling_Nipple_Slip_Number_Six

http://www.egotastic.com/entertainment/celebrities/bai-ling/bai-ling-nipple-slip-number-six-002616 LingBaiWu (talk) 14:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]