User talk:Manuelt15/Archive/2009/September

Query regarding AIV report

Hello. Your report to WP:AIV has me puzzled. You note that 12.90.175.210 (talk · contribs) has committed "vandalism after final warning." Since there were four warnings on the IP's talk page at that point, the implication you are making is that the IP ignored the previous four edits and made a fifth vandalism edit. However your claim does not appear to be correct because the IP only made two edits. Could you help me understand this? Thank you, — Kralizec! (talk) 00:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Everyone makes mistakes, so do not worry about it. Thank you for the speedy response! — Kralizec! (talk) 01:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

accused of vandalism

I've been trying to remove some actionable statements from the bio of a well-known litigious subject and somehow as a result keep getting accused of vandalism, with said article automatically reverting. Please keep in mind that there has never been any proof of the deleted statements; they were only allegations, and inflammatory ones at that. How is my splicing the article to retain its legal integrity considered vandalism? Or is Wikipedia actively gunning for a lawsuit? Any explanation beyond the vague threats of being banned is welcome, but I must say that the multiple (and seemingly automatic) negative responses without apparent reflection/legal justification make the site appear less credible. The reliability of Wikipedia is already under fire; why provoke the issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.23.166.79 (talk • contribs)

Update: [1]. Cirt (talk) 12:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)