Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to Wesleyan University, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article.  Chzz  ►  02:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Wesleyan University has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://middletowneyenews.blogspot.com/2009/11/from-1909-taft-at-wesleyan-shanklin.html. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 04:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

All deletions reinserted. Robot or contributor is overactive on fictional characters (blue linked in Wikipedia) and incorrect on Middletown, Conn. newspaper article that reprints 100 year old article in the New York Times--no possible copyright infringement. In any event, additional citations added. 74.88.196.81 (talk) 04:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments on Talk:Charles Alton Ellis about your recent edits to that article. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 15:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be revised; criteria should be importance of information, not length. The facts, circumstances, and background concerning the principal design and designer of the bridge, why Joseph Strauss was attracted to and selected Ellis, Strauss' own failed designs for the bridge, and the revolutionary work of Leon Moisseiff (theory of design of suspension bridge) and Ellis (laborious and creative application of theory in practice--including extensive work in physics and calculus, involving three years of effort and ten volumes of calculations) are not even discussed. All revisions reverted. The current article is in skeleton form only. In sum, the bio of the man is sorely lacking even though more of his contributions to the bridge are in the article about the bridge 74.88.196.81 (talk)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Nick Meyer has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://moviemojo.blogspot.com/2006/02/news-from-lionsgate.html. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 07:16, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Remove single incorrect citation, not all proper references and edits; overactive bot. Restore all except single incorrect cite. 74.88.196.81 (talk) 07:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Michael S. Roth. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.