Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. -- 16:20, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

This message is regarding your edit summary for edits to the article Kwanzaa. Please see WP:NPA and avoid using summaries such as "rv - killerdog is not reading before making edits or else he is lying". KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As quoted from Talk:Abortion --Quasipalm 18:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• On 31 December 2005, a Free Republic Action Alert was distributed calling for a coordinated attack against several Wikipedia articles (George W. Bush, Abortion, and Kwanzaa) specifically calling for far-right POV vandalism with tips on how to evade detection. [www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1549132/posts] — HopeSeekr of xMule (Talk) 20:43, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I read the link and it was a message posted on Free Republic talk page by a private user. It should not be likened to Free Republic and it was not endorsed by FRre Republic (merely because it didn't choose to delete the users message) anymore than whatever we say here is endorsed by Wikipedia. Just thought you should know, because it looks like you didn't read the page very closely.Gator (talk) 18:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and it didn;t say anything about vandalism or "far right wing POV vandalism" that was your assumption and you revealed your own biases. It was calling for conservtives to edit more on those artciles. I don't like the approach myself but to term it "far-right POV vandalism" is unfair and needs to be stated.Gator (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• 136.215.251.179 seems to be the user Goodandevil's IP [1]. User Herostratus asked Goodandevil if he is Notwithstanding from the Free Republic forum on his talk page. [2] This is something I have also wondered, as the Free Republic member Notwithstanding, who initiated the editor recruitment on that forum, makes a characteristic mention of abortion and Kwanzaa, articles on which the Wikipedian Goodandevil has a history. Just a thought. -Kyd 21:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please get and use a logged in account, it'll make things easier--Tznkai 15:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please consult WP:NPOV before continuing to edit the Abortion page. Regards, Proto t c 16:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded Lordkazan 15:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 17:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Quasipalm/Goodandevil

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Pro-choice. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Catamorphism 16:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Pro-choice, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Catamorphism 17:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, please stop removing contect from Pro-choice. In addition to deleting pertinent information, you restored a section that editors had previously agreed to remove. In the future, if you are going to make changes to articles, it would be extremely helpful if you provided an edit summary, or mentioned your reasonings on the talk page. Thank you. romarin [talk ] 14:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't get the point. Where's the satisfaction in making edits that are guaranteed to be reverted immediately? -GTBacchus^(talk) 17:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]