WayneStateCollegeProfessor
Welcome! edit
|
RE: rudy reuttiger edit
Excuse me, what? I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. If you're referring to the article Daniel Ruettiger (which your contributions show as the only page you've edited except my User talk), I have never edited that article nor heard of the article's subject in my life. I don't believe I've even edited any article related to that one, nor given you any warnings, so could you tell me how I'm involved in this and how you decided that I was the person to talk to about an apparent reversion of your edits?
According to the page history, on July 9th and 16th you added a section entitled 'Latest News', advertising a book and a diet. Both times this was removed, in accordance with Wikipedia policy - articles are not fan pages, news sites or blogs, nor are they the place to advertise anything (book or diet), and all content must be neutral, independently verifiable, referenced and above all notable. In this case, article must also conform to the policy on biographies of living persons. Under those policies and guidelines, the removal of the content you added was entirely justified. The person who removed the content a second time also left a message on the article talk page.
If you would like to contribute to Wikipedia, please read the welcome section above. It has lots of useful information to help you with constructive contributions - particularly the Manual of Style, which shows you how to write an article in proper encyclopaedic voice and format, one of the flaws which may have drawn attention to your edit. As a newcomer you are not expected to know all this already - but you are expected to show a willingness to learn and improve. As a polite suggestion, I would start by checking your spelling and grammar, both in article edits and talk page conversations - if you are, as you stated in your comment, a university professor, clear and neat written communication should not be a problem. Above all, please don't take this notice as being unfriendly, or the removal (by someone else I might add) of your first edit as a hostile act, they are certainly not intended that way. Cheers! —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 02:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Defamation edit
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your recent edits to Oxycodone have been reverted as they could be seen to be defamatory or potentially libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
I'm not sure why you would add this to Oxycodone only to remove it five minutes later, but it's defamatory nonetheless. Please review Wikipedia's policy on adding biographical material about a living person . --CliffC (talk) 18:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)