User talk:69.81.58.226

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] January 2008

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Laser pointer. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. DJBullfish (talk) 23:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.



I don't mean to be condescending by saying this, but honestly, I think most people who know how to get on the internet and read Wikipedia already know that a laser can cause blindness, so it is probably unnecessary to put a note to that effect in our article on laser pointers. Thanks anyway, and if you have any questions or comments, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. J.delanoygabsadds 23:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to Nose. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Lradrama 18:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Rain, you will be blocked from editing. Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 18:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Pen has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Abrech (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rain

Hey, I saw the note you left for Thedjatclubrock about the edit to rain. It's probably because the idea that rain would contain a vitamin is so bizarre-sounding that he didn't think it was for real (we see an awful lot of vandalism, so we sometimes falsely identify stuff as vandalism). Plus, this IP's apparently been warned for vandalism in the past, which raises our suspicion about edits coming from it.

I think he was right to remove it, because it was not referenced, per our very fundamental verifiability policy, even though you didn't mean to vandalize. You can definitely add the info back in if you can cite a reliable source for it. Don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need anything, I'm always glad to help. Peace, delldot talk 23:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)