Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to France. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Daniel Olsen 20:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent comparisons done by Christians semi-prove that dinosaurs existed in Biblical times. Try Google searching for "dinosaurs in biblical times" (no quotes) and see what I mean. Random the Scrambled 12:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is an attempt at showing this guy that dinosaurs might not contradict the Bible. If there's no need to do this, then please revert this edit.

If you create an account you can still edit. Rich Farmbrough 21:20 23 August 2006 (GMT).

Your recent edit to France (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 10:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with the page Takato Matsuki on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it 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. If you feel that the edit I reverted should not have been reverted, please contact me. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 09:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 16:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you're only at two reverts. Still: Thank you for your attempts to improve Wikipedia. However, I would like to remind you that Wikipedia is not censored for minors, not even for profanity or pornography. You are welcome to remove clearly offensive material or inappropriate obscenities if they were added as vandalism, but please do not remove/censor profanities or remove/disclaim sexually explicit material or links that are relevant to the article. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you!
Also, we do have a policy that instructs that editing to push a point of view is known as disruption, just for your information. Thank you for making good faith edits, though. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. IrishGuy ^talk 17:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 18:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. IrishGuy ^talk 18:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to take a moment to diffuse any misconceptions to 195.93.21.33 about the block.

I've noticed your edit notes on the alterations to "Woman" state that you are a Muslim and that is why you find the images offensive. Wikipedia is not censored for people just because of their age or their religion. The image in question is not meant to be offensive, but rather informative about the female body and general outer physical structure, and I completely understand how you find it offensive, but I advise you to take a neutral point of view about the image and to not contest reverts multiple times (see the 3 Revert Rule). --Sivius ^T-C 00:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed content from France. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to Roy 'Chubby' Brown (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 16:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to Andes (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 18:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AOL proxy IP is temporarily blocked from making anonymous edits. Either wait for the block to expire, get a different browser (e.g. Firefox), or register. Rich Farmbrough, 18:43 21 September 2006 (GMT).