User talk:Chrisrushlau

Your edit to Top Secret

Just for your information, House noticed the marine and he was in his dream because House has seen him before, at a party where the marine was making out with Cuddy. Watch the episode near the end again.
Blind man shady 22:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but why did he dream about him right before he turned up at the hospital?

You edited the page about Taqiyya. I can understand your misgivings about the article, but you went about dealing with them in entirely the wrong way. The style of your update was entirely inappropriate for an encyclopaedia. Please read through Wikipedia policies before making any more updates - specifically about appropriate style (don't write in first person!!!), and about original research. Your objections to the article were based on the verifiability of its content - these objections belong on the talk page and in edits you make to the body of the article (asking for sources, writing new objective info based on new sources, deleting unsupported claims) not in a paragraph of the article itself. It's great that you take an interest in improving Wikipedia; please be a bit more familiarised with policy before you take another whack at it. Thanks!

Update: I deleted the edit for now as I found it unsalvageable. It is too based on opinion and personal experience, as well as in the wrong style, to absorb into the article. HOWEVER please feel free to add back any information that you can support in line with Wikipedia policy.

WP:COATRACK

Your opinion that something "must be put into perspective" is strictly your opinion. Per WP:NOR and COATRACK, it doesn't go in. Please do not engage in further reverting but instead follow WP:BRD. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at User talk:RandomCanadian, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. What you did is nothing short of a serious personal attack, and that is not allowed here. If you disagree with my assessment of your edit (and I am quite sure I would not be the only one who will say to you that your edit was improper), then you ought to, first, read the relevant guidelines, and second, if you still disagree, make a post on the article talk page. Personal attacks and harassment of the kind you posted to my talk page will get you nowhere. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:51, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LOL (laugh out loud), though it took a couple of hours to hit. You really worked for it, I must say. Seeing what your ominous comment looks like here in editing mode reminds me of the technical intricacies of Wikipedia, making it prey to insider influence, leading to its loss of reputation and effectiveness as a community resource. Imagine going into a voting booth and being told to select your choices according to the algorithm listed in section C. Combine that with a few "only warning" logos and people might start to lose faith in the system.Chrisrushlau (talk) 17:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]