Contents 1 June 2008 2 Image tagging for Image:Georgia Central.jpg 3 June 2008 4 Barack Obama 5 Core policies

[edit] June 2008

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles, such as those you made to African American, even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Georgia Central.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Georgia Central.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your edits to September 11, 2001 attacks, Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. RxS (talk) 02:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not legitimate, you inserted a (at best) fringe theory into the lead of an article that's under an Arbcom case [1]. If you feel more content needs to be added please use the talk page. Not only that, you implied certain politicians are guilty of mass murder. There's no legitimate debate among reliable sources that the Bush administration planned the attacks. Your opinion that the constant blaming of Al-Queda for the attacks is nonsense does not constitute a justification for that edit. RxS (talk) 04:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 2008

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Evolution. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dawn Bard (talk) 18:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Evolution, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This article deals with the verifiable view of evolution in reliable sources on the topic. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barack Obama

Please look at an article's talk page for previous discussion and consensus before making a controversial edit as you did. That's the way it's done on Wikipedia, not to mention common courtesy. Read WP:BLP and WP:CON. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 21:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Barack Obama, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Newguy34 (talk) 06:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Core policies

Content must be

• neutral
• verifiable
• not original research

User conduct must

• be civil
• assume good faith of others
• not contain personal attacks

Edits in general should

• not be disruptive
• have consensus

This list should be enough to keep you out of trouble. Regards, SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 21:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)