You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 48 hours as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated.-Wafulz (talk) 18:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per your repeated insertion of the remnant source, please read our external links guidelines. There is no doubt that that source does not conform to the guidelines; that has been elaborated on the talk page.

That type of repeated additions of inappropriate material is disruptive to the project. You were already blocked on account of it before; there is a reason for that. For a bit maybe, take a look at the guidelines I linked to above, here, and in the below banner. I understand you're a new editor, so I apologize things have been rocky so far, but familiarizing yourself with how the project works will help improve your experience here. But anyway....

Welcome!

Hello, Ryannx211, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Baccyak4H (Yak!) 13:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding a Q/A bloglike link to articles that are not about the source itself. You have previously been warned and blocked about this, and yet you now have added it to an article about a living it. As the source is both disparaging as well as factually challenged in some parts, this is even more unacceptable on such pages.

In addition, please don't add comentary about article editing into the article itself; use the article's talkpage. I'm am neither endorsing nor refuting that particular commentary at this time, just explaining the general principle.

As a more general concern, I have noticed your editing has consisted of essentially adding this one link to various articles. It strikes me as plausible that you may have some relation to the author or source of that content. I apologize in advance if that is not the case, but if indeed it is, please be aware of our guidelines concerning conflict of interest and spamming.

Seriously, I think if you followed the advice earlier on this page and learned about how our project works, you would have an easier, more producive and enjoyable experience here. Please take this advice, otherwise you will not come to enjoy working on the project. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 16:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See this. You know, there are ways to learn how to contribute productively. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 18:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The link you keep adding to Theology of the Body is a critique of Christopher West's book, not of Pope John Paul's teaching. It's not useful to the TOTB article. Lyrl^Talk _C 12:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Theology of the Body, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing their websites from appearing on Wikipedia. It is not acceptable on Wikipedia to edit war. Please bring up any concerns you have at Talk:Theology of the Body, do not simply reinsert your link. Lyrl^Talk _C 13:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a period of 55 hours from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Lyrl^Talk _C 17:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While editing about oneself, an endeavor one's involved in, or (in your case) promoting sources one is is invested in, are not precluded per se by our conflict of interest guidelines, doing so should be done very cautiously to avoid the appearance of disruption. A good and failsafe suggestion is to propose such edits on the talk page of the relevent article, and then allow the edit or an improvement of it after consensus is reached. You can read more about the ideas behind such issues at the guideline page.

One more point: while indeed Wikipedia is not censored, neither is it an indiscriminate collection of information, a linkfarm, or a soapbox, either for propaganda or self-promotion. Please take the time to familiarize yourself about the goals and principles of the project; this will aid both your contributions to the project and any outside commentary about it you may have. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 18:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]