User talk:ZHurlihee

Welcome!

Hello, ZHurlihee! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Clarkcj12 (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

hydraulic fracturing article

Hi ZHurlihee,

Thanks for your solid work on the article on hydraulic fracturing. I was a little confused by one of your deletions, though. You deleted a large chunk of well-sourced text (which someone had no doubt worked hard on) under the rationale that it was redundant with the article on the FRAC act. However, that text wasn't to be found in the latter article, nor was an even remotely equivalent section. I agree that it's good to cut down redundancies and tighten up articles, but valuable information can get lost if we're overzealous with deletion. I've added the text you deleted to the FRAC act article, and added a template - {{main|Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act}} - to the section in the hydrofracking article so that interested users can know that there's another article that deals with the subject in more depth. I hope you find this solution satisfactory. Sindinero (talk) 14:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I honestly didn’t know the material wasn’t in the parent article. I'm glad you fixed that. ZHurlihee (talk) 14:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

John Walker Lindh

Hi, before an edit war started, I posted on the JWL Talk page my reasoning for why the National Geographic link should be kept on the page. Feel free to discuss it with me there! jlcoving (talk) 23:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Well done

		The Epic Barnstar
		For your contributions and adding a dose of reality to the Phoenix Program

Well done on your up hill effort to bring a little balance to the article. The tough part is trying to keep it balanced. V7-sport (talk) 02:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! ZHurlihee (talk) 13:27, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits, as you are doing in Jamie Leigh Jones. It appears you may be engaged in an edit war. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. You have violated this rule with 4 reverts in the past three hours. 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. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. Thank you.

Section blanking is vandalism and that alone counts for two of my edits today. ZHurlihee (talk) 18:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Section blanking is not automatically vandalism; even less so when it's a removal of libelous material, as in this case. I hope you'll keep 3RR in mind when editing this article or to others; future violations of the rule will see you reported. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Section blanking is vandalism when there isnt so much as an edit summary to go along with it. But I will take your words of caution for what they are worth. On a side note, while the article talk page may not be a WP:FORUM, my talk page most certainly can be. This Jones woman is obviously mentally disturbed and lied about what happened. Why she did it, who knows, but she’s hardly the first woman to cry wolf about being raped. The EEOC saw it, the jury in her civil suit saw it and even a left journalist at MotherJones saw it. ZHurlihee (talk) 18:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, you have an opinion! How cute. Why don't you run off and show your mummy? I'm sure she'll be very proud. *pats your little head* Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm truly sorry that you have to rely on insults and demeaning people to make a point .. truly I am. It’s the hallmark of a closed mind and weak intellect and I am sure you fancy yourself as some kind of clever freethinking nonconformist. But women lie about being reaped with a disturbing degree of regularity. In cases like this, when a political end can be served by the lie, people on one side or the other tend to throw away reason and logic and buy into the fakers story because it enables a partisan end. ZHurlihee (talk) 19:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)