Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Walam Olum. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. IP changed lead to make it contradict the article Dougweller (talk) 19:41, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

: Stop your obstructive actions immediately. The vast majority of information pertaining to the Walam Olum does not square with the contradictory views and personal opinions presented.

Some more of these reliable sources include:

1. American Literature History, Andrew Newman, 2010

"In what is probably the capstone of the Walam Olum’s publication history as an authentic

document—postdating Oestreicher’s debunking—it appears

as the longest selection of the Multilingual Anthology of American

Literature: A Reader of Original Texts with English Translations

(2000), edited by Marc Shell and Werner Sollors

Dennis Tedlock ... comparing it to apparently related forms such as

the Ojibwa Midewin Birchbark scrolls

2. The multilingual Anthology of American Literature by Shell and Sollors, 2000

3. McCutchen's The Red Record, 1993

4. CA Weslager's The Delaware Indians, 1972

Yawn. Andrew Newman agrees with Oestreicher's debunking, for a start, and you changed the lead to contradict the article (eg to remove the bit about it provoking controversy, controversy clearly shown and cited in the article) - vandalism. Dougweller (talk) 04:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV - Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit my user page. Ever. That was merely a collection of linkss for my own reference, and was not copyrightable. Heiro 03:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Considering you are indefinitely blocked at this acct I suggest you stay off my user page and not draw so much attention to yourself. Thanks. Heiro 03:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User Heironymous_Rowe and Doug Weller are constantly commiting Wikihounding, harassment and continued Personal Attacks. Please stop!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Heironymous_Rowe

I have warned this user and Doug Weller to stop their personal attacks and wikihounding. It has continued since 2007.

They constantly cite my personal website and webpage on thier page. This information is copyrighted.

I have no interest in further discussion and wish to exercise my right to vanish. They may not use my copyrighted website on theirs.

See following links for the evidence of this personal attacks. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AHeironymous_Rowe&action=historysubmit&diff=457596593&oldid=457596131

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AErgative_rlt&action=historysubmit&diff=437350197&oldid=436635168

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AWalam_Olum&action=historysubmit&diff=437350127&oldid=437350107

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at User:Heironymous Rowe, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BilCat (talk) 03:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text ((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~)), but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

03:46, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

They are indef blocked here [Marburg72], under their named acct., this is one of about 3 IPs xe periodically pops up on. Heiro 03:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh goody, now I'm getting nice little emails. Can we get that revoked too? Heiro 03:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is published for educational purposes at no cost. Please do not reproduce without permission. Copyright 2008 Vince Barrows All rights reserved.

Revoking own talk page access might be a good thing too. :) - BilCat (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of one year for abuse of editing privileges. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text ((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~)), but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dougweller (talk) 06:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Note that this is a static IP being used for block evasion. Dougweller (talk) 06:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]