Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Eeekster‎. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 05:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Eeekster. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 05:43, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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 may 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) 05:48, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Eeekster, you will be blocked from editing. Please refrain from posting any more attacks on my talk page. Eeekster (talk) 05:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an agency of US (or any country's) policy. It is an encyclopedia. As such it is not a publisher of primary sources. This means that for something to have an article on Wikipedia it must be both verifiable and notable. The LOC link now on Taliban (screenplay) shows that a document with this title was registers with the LOC sometime in 2001 (it does not show the date) (the link now shows a date in june -DES). It does not show the content of this document, nor that it matches the document imaged in the http://www.rengacorp.com/iWeb/rengacorp.com/PAGE%201.html link. More importantly, this does not show that anyone else has taken note of this document. Wikipedia is not the place to bring previously unnoted things to general attention. Wikipedia is for bringing together accounts of things already in public view, and that have been written about in independent, published, reliable sources. The corporate web site of the company that (apparently) owns this screen play is not an independent, reliable source. Has there been any news coverage of this screen play? Has it been mentioned in any published book, article, or journal? Has anyone not connected with it written about it and published that writing? If not, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia, however accurate and verifiable the existence of the document may be.

Yelling at Eeekster, or at anyone else, will not help your case. No one is in a conspiracy to suppress your work. We merely are trying to insist on Wikipedia's longstanding policies on what should and what should not be included. As to promotion, please read our conflict of interest guideline and our guidelines on advertising. You might also want to read our guidelines on civility and not making personal attacks. DES ^(talk) 14:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RENGACORP . Thank you. DES ^(talk) 14:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My appologies. Thwe appropriate clerk ahs indicated that your actions in opening anew acccount are perfectly proper. The case listed above has been closed. I made an error in opening it. DES ^(talk) 16:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Growing up poor I do admit to utilizing a sock instead of a traditional muppet for my entertainment. How this relates 40 years later is a mystery.  ;)THINKTANKSWORK (talk) 21:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I enjoyed the note on your userpage, and I do agree on your idea of the perplexing nature of anonymity. However, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia--that is, a compendium of previously-published information; and we shouldn't pretend that it's anything more than that. There is very little way that a project such as this could verify the real-world identities of its editors. For instance, I could create the userpage User:DarrylStrawberry, and then go about editing articles on him, his accomplishments and his associates, claiming first-hand knowledge of events. For all you know, I am Darryl Strawberry. That is why we rely on reliable, secondary sources for the verification of claims made in this encyclopedia. That way, any editor can confirm the information if they so choose.

As for your article, Taliban (screenplay); the simple existence of a thing does not necessarily mean it should be written about in an encyclopedia. And editing about things that you are intimately involved with is not contrary to any rule here--it is simply emphasized that one should do so with great caution, as folks tend to want to present themselves and their works in the best possible light. If you want to conduct original research showing how multiple entities predicted the events surrounding the terrorist attacks on the U.S., there are so many other venues where you can add to that already expansive body of work.

As for changing the world for the better, please do. Just know that encyclopedias may not be the best forum for doing that. Cheers, Steamroller Assault (talk) 00:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]