User talk:Thechessstick
Please stop your disruptive edits to this article. As you can see from the talk-page and numerous edit-history comments, your concern about the wording appears based on ab apparent misunderstanding of the formal meaning of the wording itself. DMacks (talk) 08:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- This edit- the term Creation Myth IS scholarly, and that's why we use it. --King Öomie 14:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
March 2010
[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kent Hovind, you will be blocked from editing. Please stop pushing your own POV on this article - the correct meaning of the term "Creation Myth" has been explained to you, it is academically correct and does not imply falsity, and the consensus is that Wikipedia should use it. If you continue to push your own view against the consensus, you could end up with your account blocked -- Boing! said Zebedee 17:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
April 2010
[edit]
This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Kent Hovind, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NeilN talk to me 03:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)