User talk:Childishknack

Your edit to Dave Mustaine

Your recent edit to Dave Mustaine (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 08:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Megadeth. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 09:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Kevin DuBrow, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 09:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Bon Jovi, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 09:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to question

I don't normally respond to users with such a busy(albeit brief) history of vandalism but I will assume good faith for now. As for citations refer to WP:CITE. It will explain better than I can. As for trivia sections, they are poor additions better suited for a teen magazines. But if you can add citations it will provide some credibility. On Wikipedia there is such a thing as "too much trivia". Read WP:TRIVIA for proper guidelines on what is notable and what is crap. Hope that helps. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 11:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest this: Wikipedia:Avoid_trivia_sections_in_articles. You are right Anger22, trivia sections are for pop mags, and are um, well, trivial. --Merbabu 11:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re your latest comments on the Talk:Bono page, I notice it is your first day, and I am not the only person to advise you against trivia. Please advise why I should obey your direction to leave the trivia alone. Perhaps you could also explain why you cite WP:AGF - i miss the relevance. Remember, lets focus on the articles, not the editors. Please don't take changes to your edits personally. Please note down the bottom of the edit page it says: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." regards--Merbabu 13:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Faith Hill trivia section

Trivia sections are frowned on in Wikipedia articles. In your case, the trivia section you added contained two items that were already discussed in the article and thus redundant, and two others that belong in the mainline sections of the article, as they help illustrate the flow of Hill's career. My first deletion of the entire section was too hasty, I admit. I have now redone my edit, moving the two useful items into their correct place. Wasted Time R 14:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Talk page material

Twice you've tried to delete material from Talk:Faith Hill. This is almost always improper. The talk page is simply a record of meta-discussion about the article, and as such everyone's contribution is part of the record and cannot be removed. If you disagree with something that's been said, the proper action is to explain why, not remove it. The only cases where material should be deleted from Talk sections is in the case of legally actionable libel, copyright violation, etc. Wasted Time R 14:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]