Perhaps you'd like to write something at Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association? Even if it's a stub, that would help Wikipedia out; however, a placeholder isn't much use. Melchoir 05:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not create a placeholder. I edited the placeholder.

Unfortunately this organization refers to itself online almost exclusively as "CTIA", a mnemonic with numerous online aliases. I wrote this edit after being invited to a CTIA conference and finding that I could not find out the meaning of "CTIA" even after visiting the official website and after searching Wikipedia and Google for "CTIA". This is a large, important organization. I will make further edits as I learn more about it.

In the mean time, why don't you do something useful? Go eliminate this garbage entry, "Codeless". I am not sure how to purge a whole entry.

Great, I look forward to seeing the article! As for Codeless, that doesn't seem to be an article. Could you provide me with a link to the problem you're talking about? Thanks, Melchoir 10:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Codeless" Seems to have been purged

Here is another in Wikitravel, a nice piece of satire but dangerous. Maybe we should start a "Comediapedia".

San Serriffe "Alas, independent San Serriffe rapidly turned into an autocratic dictatorship under the rule of General Pica" "The national sport of San Serriffe is kerning"

"By train" "San Serriffe once has an extensive network of narrow-gauge trains pulled by water buffalo. However, after General Melior decreed that only girls who had never had sexual intercourse may act as train conductors, the system ground to a halt due to a lack of eligible workers and was sold off as scrap."

Hello Stodieck. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Piaggio P.180 Avanti, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Ahunt (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2012 (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 could also click on the signature button or 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 they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at User talk:Nigel Ish, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 00:56, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry "Dave" I don't recall making a personal attack on Nigel. Maybe you can quote the text? This is your only warning. Otherwise you will be asked to leave the future immediately.--Stodieck (talk) 01:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe the edit in question is this one, which is quite obviously a personal attack. "Leaving out" the actual words ("take your COI warning and...") doesn't mean that the meaning, and attack, isn't clear. Also, accusing another editor of vandalism as you did in these edits when they have not vandalised at all is also a personal attack, and you have multiple other parts of those comments that fly in the face of WP:CIVIL. Please comment on content, not contributors; continued comments in the vein of these will result in blocks. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Ahunt, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 06:07, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

isn't it hilarious how dave issues warnings as though anyone cares?

The comment "take your COI warning and..." was actually an intermediate edit and was immediately removed a mouse click late. Unfortunately, WP captures all process. In the mean time, Dave's warnings appear to be a personal attack. --Stodieck (talk) 18:16, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]