User talk:65.34.164.133

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] September 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. It appears you have not followed this policy at Atheism. Please always observe our core policies. Thank you. TeaDrinker 16:39, 15 September 2007 (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.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

Currently, you are editing without a username. You can continue to do so, as you are not required to log in to Wikipedia to read and edit articles; however, logging in will result in a username being shown instead of your IP address (yours is 65.34.164.133). Logging in does not require any personal details. There are many other benefits for logging in to Wikipedia. For now, if you are stuck, you can type {{helpme}} on this page and an experienced Wikipedian will be around to answer any questions you may have.

Please note these points:

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, ask me on my Talk page. I will answer your questions as far as I can! Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Criticism of atheism. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. MacAddct  1984 (talk • contribs) 03:53, 1 February 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.

[edit] Fall of Constantinople

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Fall of Constantinople. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Tourskin (talk) 03:24, 16 February 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.

You changed the result of the battle to a meaningless "Moderate victory". Read the article's aftermath and see the footnote attached, which gives a list of websites testifying to this monumentous event. In short:

  • It meant the end of Eastern Christian states
  • It allowed the Turks to conquer much of Eastern Europe
  • It made the Turks a superpower and able to build a grand fleet to challenege Venice, driving her from Crete and Cyprus.
  • It ended the Christian trade for spices; Portugal, Spain and other European countries sailed around the world in search of another route to Asia to get cheaper spices, not taxed by the Turks.

How can this be a moderate victory? You have no arguments. In wikipedia, the edits of individuals who do not obey reason are rightfully removed. Tourskin (talk) 03:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It does not matter how easy a victory comes, its the consequences. The fall had earth shattering consequences and teh cannons were not 100 tons. You are giving made up facts regarding their cannons, whic broke down any ways before the conclusion of the siege. Tourskin (talk) 22:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Criticism of atheism, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Darry2385 (talk) 23:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Rational Response Squad, you will be blocked from editing. Nightscream (talk) 00:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Your statements about the RRS are not facts. They're opinions. Wikipedia is guided by a number of policies and guidelines, including Wikipedia: NPOV, Wikipedia: OR, Wikipedia: Citing sources, Wikipedia: Soapbox, Wikipedia: POINT, etc. Opinions can only be introduced if they are attributed to a reliable source considered an expert on the topic in question, or closely associated with it. The opinions of individual editors, however, cannot. Thus, saying that "This movie was awful" is not permissible, but "Roger Ebert said the movie was awful" is, so long as the source of the statement is cited. For this reason, your personal views of the RRS cannot be placed into the article. If you need any further help in contributing to Wikipedia, just let me know. Just make sure that you sign your posts. You can do so by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of them. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)