User talk:68.36.175.168

Uncited, non-constructive edits
There has never been anything to discuss with you other than your own vindictive edits.

I welcome a review by your Admin and your vindictive edits, as if you had researched these edits as closely as you claim to in these User Talk tirades, you would see that many of your claims are false and that you are severing and changing long standing approved edits, additions, and information.

I never wrote : "The film is expected to be an Indian Blockbuster from the hype, Hollywood REMIX, and with no major release for the next two weeks after it's release"...Someone else did. - Did you go butcher everything they added to Wikipedia too ?

You keep kicking "Skull & Chopsticks" info of the "Mic Neumann" page when it was Wikipedia that merged the two entries.

I supply all of the links to all of the people I have worked with who list me, Michael "Mic" Neumann aka Mic Neumann as working with them in Wikipedia, yet you don't just delete them, you wholesale delete everything.

I don't know what your problem is with me, and I am sorry if I do not understand all of the exact rules that you state need to be followed in making entries as all I know is that I am trying to use Wikipedia for what I thought it was intended for, which is a source of truthful information supplied by the source.

You seem to have some other slash and burn approach to people or things that you don't seem to like, as I could find hundreds of less qualified or non-cited entries, yet you seem to have singled me out as a special focus of your single handed destruction.

Your current Admin investigation should reveal that past Admin evaluations have found my entries suitable after your protests, yet you continue to attack my entries at every opportunity.

I feel sorry for people who get such great pleasure out of such petty grievances as I know everything I have entered is true, and everyone knows you can not every circumstance involved in your life documented by a third party.

Why don't you lighten up and above all get your facts straight and think hard about your use of the word "Evidently POV", because that is exactly what you are doing with the majority of your claims, and it is this that is exactly the reason I have found having a discussion with you a waste of time.

I am entering facts about my life and my projects and you delete them.

A perfect example of your overzealousness as I have mentioned above is your repeated wholesale removal of the "Skull & Chopsticks" entry from my "Mic Neumann" page, when it was Wikipedia that merged them together in the first place, and who is going to know what the meaning of the "Skull & Chopsticks" logo means without me stating it, since only I know what it stands for ?

No, in your world...I have to tell someone else about it first, then they have to publish it, then I can enter it with citations ? - Well then why did Wikipedia let me enter in the first place so long ago.

If this it what people like you are contributing to Wikipedia ... I am really at a loss for words.

I guess I should be happy that I gave a someone like you an evil dragon like me to slay.

Sincerely, Michael "Mic" Neumann - & - if you want to discuss something call me at [redacted]

As I wrote before, and as is available via your page history, you have been making a series of unconstructive edits that violate multiple Wikipedia policies. At Kites (film) and Dubtitle, you have variously
 * removed citation-request tags without providing citations
 * made multiple uncited, non-footnoted claims, some of them evidently POV and OR
 * left no edit summaries
 * refused discussion
 * added such hype as "The film is expected to be an Indian Blockbuster from the hype, Hollywood REMIX, and with no major release for the next two weeks after it's release"
 * and engaged in apparent sock-puppetry via anon IP 209.236.250.213. An admin has checked and has seen that one of these two IPs appears to be a mobile phone IP, and the other a home IP.

I have asked several times over the last few days that you discontinue your disruptive edits. After several warnings, I have begun dialog with an admin who may choose to block your IPs from editing Wikipedia. You do not appear interested in constructive edits, behavior or dialog. This is not in the best interest of this encyclopedia. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Uncited, non-constructive edits
There has never been anything to discuss with you other than your own vindictive edits.

I welcome a review by your Admin and your vindictive edits, as if you had researched these edits as closely as you claim to in these User Talk tirades, you would see that many of your claims are false and that you are severing and changing long standing approved edits, additions, and information.

I never wrote : "The film is expected to be an Indian Blockbuster from the hype, Hollywood REMIX, and with no major release for the next two weeks after it's release"...Someone else did. - Did you go butcher everything they added to Wikipedia too ?

You keep kicking "Skull & Chopsticks" info of the "Mic Neumann" page when it was Wikipedia that merged the two entries.

I supply all of the links to all of the people I have worked with who list me, Michael "Mic" Neumann aka Mic Neumann as working with them in Wikipedia, yet you don't just delete them, you wholesale delete everything.

I don't know what your problem is with me, and I am sorry if I do not understand all of the exact rules that you state need to be followed in making entries as all I know is that I am trying to use Wikipedia for what I thought it was intended for, which is a source of truthful information supplied by the source.

You seem to have some other slash and burn approach to people or things that you don't seem to like, as I could find hundreds of less qualified or non-cited entries, yet you seem to have singled me out as a special focus of your single handed destruction.

Your current Admin investigation should reveal that past Admin evaluations have found my entries suitable after your protests, yet you continue to attack my entries at every opportunity.

I feel sorry for people who get such great pleasure out of such petty grievances as I know everything I have entered is true, and everyone knows you can not every circumstance involved in your life documented by a third party.

Why don't you lighten up and above all get your facts straight and think hard about your use of the word "Evidently POV", because that is exactly what you are doing with the majority of your claims, and it is this that is exactly the reason I have found having a discussion with you a waste of time.

I am entering facts about my life and my projects and you delete them.

A perfect example of your overzealousness as I have mentioned above is your repeated wholesale removal of the "Skull & Chopsticks" entry from my "Mic Neumann" page, when it was Wikipedia that merged them together in the first place, and who is going to know what the meaning of the "Skull & Chopsticks" logo means without me stating it, since only I know what it stands for ?

No, in your world...I have to tell someone else about it first, then they have to publish it, then I can enter it with citations ? - Well then why did Wikipedia let me enter in the first place so long ago.

If this it what people like you are contributing to Wikipedia ... I am really at a loss for words.

I guess I should be happy that I gave a someone like you an evil dragon like me to slay.

Sincerely, Michael "Mic" Neumann - & - if you want to discuss something call me at #1-(212)-388-8480

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Michael "Mic" Neumann has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Shadowjams (talk) 06:21, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Michael "Mic" Neumann, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. NYCRuss  ☎  19:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

June 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Falcon8765 (talk) 23:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Paper (magazine). Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Falcon8765 (talk) 23:39, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Jonathan Peters has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Sea photo Talk 01:19, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

additions.
If you persist in adding unsourced material about living figures, it is likely that this IP range will be blocked and the articles you are so intent in ramming these 'facts' into will be locked to editing. I suggest you find some sources for your claims. --Cameron Scott (talk) 17:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Seriously, you need reliable sources for this information. Your desire to get these into the articles suggests you are connected to the subject or are being paid to do so? Is this the case? --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I am Mic Neumann for Christ Sake ! - I created Kung Faux & Dubtitled & Popdetail & Co-founded Nylon Magazine & Tommy Boy Entertainment ! - I am the source ! - Why don't you simply try a "Google" search of this stuff ?

Every time I tried to add links & sources in the past they never stuck, so I gave up & now instead of constructive edits I am just getting my stuff blown to smithereens.

'''Where can I get a citation that proves to me that you are who you say you are Cameron Scott ?

If you wrote about who you are and what you do on Wikipedia would it hold up to the same firestorm I am now getting?'''

I have been up on the Wikipedia site for years and over the last two or three, I keep getting some guy wanting to chop everything off at the knees !

This my life & my creations and I am trying to put it out there the way Wikipedia invited me too all of those years ago, and now if one person with Admin Edit power feels like it, they just chop it off at the knees.

Who screens for all of the people with chips on their shoulder to be allowed to edit?


 * "Why don't you simply try a "Google" search of this stuff ?" I did, it doesn't return any reliable sources. The problem is this, your personal testimony can't be the basis of articles on wikipedia, it has to be reliable sources (newspaper articles, magazine articles, reviews etc). Without such sources, we can't have an article. --Cameron Scott (talk) 13:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Cameron Scott is behaving appropriately and responsibly. Anon IP 68.36.175.168 appears to have a basic misunderstanding of Wikipedia when he says "to use Wikipedia for what I thought it was intended for, which is a source of truthful information supplied by the source." Wikipedia uses factual information verifiable by third-party reliable source citations &mdash; not, in fact, by ostensible primarily sources, who, first, cannot be verified, and, secondly, are not unbiased, disinterested sources of information.--Tenebrae (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Mic Neumann has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://blogs.myspace.com/micneumann/. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 21:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Please read this.
Look, nobody is out to get you, it's simply that our articles must be based on reliable sources (which are described at WP:RS. If we can't find reliable sources for something that we generally remove it - it's nothing personal. If you think there are reliable sources for your edits, please help us find them. --Cameron Scott (talk) 17:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to the page Mic Neumann do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Donald Duck (talk) 17:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in this edit to Mic Neumann. Inappropriate links include links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that serve as advertising or promotion. Thank you. Donald Duck (talk) 17:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Mic Neumann. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. 10metreh (talk) 17:53, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war&#32;at Mic Neumann. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mic Neumann, you may be blocked from editing. Df747jet (talk) 05:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:68.36.175.168, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''You do not own your User Talk Page. You may not blank it, but you may archive it if you don't like the warnings.'' Df747jet (talk) 05:18, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for sockof User:Squeezedot. 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 below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dougweller (talk) 08:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.