User talk:MikeHydro

Welcome[edit]

Hello, MikeHydro, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dawnseeker2000 00:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Dementia. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.-gadfium 22:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Graben[edit]

I've modified part of your recent addition and removed most for now. You need to provide complete references for what you add. Much that I removed was rather arguementative and rambling "discussion" better added to a talk page than to article content. Please provide references and focus on clarity and sentence structure if you re-add the info. Vsmith (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of material to Greenstone belt[edit]

Hi, I reverted your addition of material copied from here to the article. The text is copyrighted so if you want to use the information it will require a complete rewrite. This can be very tedious I know, but we need to do it to avoid claims of copyright infringement. Have a look at WP:COPYVIO. Thanks, Mikenorton (talk) 16:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010[edit]

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. A contribution you made to Somerset Levels appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. — Rod ^talk 19:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Köppen climate classification. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Bidgee (talk) 13:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010[edit]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Fourth-generation programming language, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mendip Hills[edit]

Thanks for your additions to Mendip Hills. You appear to have tried to reference the material you have added however the details provided are insufficient for references. Can you clarify:

Is (Findlay D.C. Soil Survey of England and Wales) the same as "Findlay, D. C., Colborne, G. J. N., Cope, D. W., Harrod, T. R., Hogan, D. V. and Staines, S. J. 1984. Soils and their Use in South West England, Soil Survey of England and Wales, Harpenden, 419"
Does ORS = Old Red Sandstone - abbreviations are best avoided
Do you have a reference for "much of the system has eroded away by 2010, compared to the state in 1969"
Atkinson T. C., Drew D. P., Smith D. I. and Mendip Cave Club reports is not a reference anyone could follow up - can you give details for the named authors - is this one paper or several? is it a book? which Mendip Cave Club reports?
what is the reference to M.D. Newson which you mention?
"a bad state for an A.N.O.B. that needs to be rectified and some of these paths are extremely dangerous." needs to be referenced otherwise it could be assumed it is just your opinion & we need to maintain a neutral point of view

It would be great if you could clarify some of these contributions otherwise they run the risk of being deleted.— Rod ^talk 21:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010[edit]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Climatic Research Unit email controversy, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the persistent nature of your unacceptably bad editing, I have raised the subject at WP:AN/I#MikeHydro repeatedly adding personal commentary to articles with a recommendation that you be indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

Hi Mike, I'm sorry to inform you that I have reviewed the report to ANI regarding your editing and have now blocked your account. I have no doubt that you have good intentions but your edits are unacceptable - they are damaging our articles and injecting unsourced material and personal opinions into articles. Note that article talk pages are provided for making comments about the article content and you should be posting comments about the article itself there, not into the text of the article. Wikipedia is a project to build an encyclopedia and because we want information here to be verifiable by other editors and readers, we do not allow people to add personal material to articles and instead require material be sourced to verifiable reliable sources. Your comment on Dawnseeker2000's talk page makes it clear that you have no intention of stopping adding such material and you have ignored all other warnings and pleas to stop so I am left with no other option but to disable your ability to make changes to articles. You stated on Dawnseeker2000's talk page that you're a legally appointed representative of a university - I don't know what that's about but we don't recognise any such appointments and all users are expected to comply with the same rules which state that Original Research is not acceptable and all material must be able to be sourced to Verifiable Reliable Sources. You also claimed that Dawnseeker2000's "removal is actually illegal and a definite infringement of my international rights and the freedom of information and protection of database laws." I don't know what changes were made or what "international rights" you are referring to, but this is a privately owned website and we are entitled to develop and apply rules as necessary in furthering our mission of creating a free encyclopedia and you are can either operate within those rules or if you find them unacceptable, you may decline to contribute to this project but as a privately owned website, we're not obliged to provide a venue for free speech or anything along those lines. If you decide you want to edit here, you may submit an appeal on this page and I would be happy to give it consideration, but you will need to agree to comply with our rules and cease adding personal opinions, unsourced material and first-hand information to articles in order for us to consider unblocking you. Sarah 03:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that I received a very bizarre, rambling and incoherent email from this user, laced with legal threats and talking about unrelated subjects such as the Australian aboriginal community, Islam, the war in Iraq, global warming, UEA, Copenhagen and including quotes from the Bible. He claims that my block of his account is "illegal" and "a criminal offence internationally" and that by blocking him I have infringed on his rights as "a qualified Geology and hydrology soils Senior Lecturer". In response to my comments above regarding his disruptive editing, he wrote: "you are a liar and I will prove that in court" and then accused me of being a "criminal alike Israel murdering children, the USA bombing Iraq" and claimed he would report me to "the Internet authority". Given his bizarre and incoherent email and legal threats, I have declined to unblock him and am noting this here in the event other admins consider an unblock in future. Sarah 00:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]