TheCakeThief
March 2009
edit
Welcome to Wikipedia. The project's content policies require that all articles be written from a neutral point of view, and not introduce bias or give undue weight to viewpoints. Please bear this in mind when making edits such as your recent edit to Devil May Cry 4. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. EdBever (talk) 13:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
-I don't believe that what I have edited on the Devil may Cry 4 Page was Bias or anything of that matter. I was just stating that it didn't receive such positive reactions from other fans of the series who felt differently.
TheCakeThief.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Devil May Cry 4. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Megaman en m (talk) 14:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey man, would you mind stop editing the DMC 4 article with unprofessional reviews and resources? We don't need the fans' reactions regarding the game, okay? Don't edit the article again or we will be forced to report you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.194.142 (talk) 11:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
As per WP:LEAD the lead section should summarise the entire article including reception. Stop removing the content about reception in the lead please. 84.215.17.68 (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I think you mean to speak to 203.87.194.142, as he's the one having the problem with your addition to the reception section. I was complaining about your removal of the reception in the lead section. 84.215.17.68 (talk) 10:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I've already pointed out in a previous edit summary that these reviews are under discussion on the Talk page, and the article is semi-protected. It's an abuse to edit through that protection without taking part in the discussion, and your options are to discuss, or I will fully-protect the article, or you will be blocked for disruptive editing. Please choose carefully. Rodhullandemu 02:20, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Actually I did take part in the discussion talk page and what I did was merely ADDED to the quotations. I took out nothing. I mentioned that if you were going to QUOTE them, then quote them properly. Which you refuse to do. The part that I edited reflect the reception part. TCT (talk) 02:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)