User talk:76.15.46.220/Archive 1

Thomas McEvilley
Please don't add huge amounts of reviews to an article such as Thomas McEvilley. This is a copyright violation. Corvus cornix talk  05:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop adding copyright violation sto Thomas McEvilley. Corvus cornix talk  05:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Corvus cornix talk  00:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

This is your only warning. You previously vandalized Thomas McEvilley, and you're doing it again. Stop now or be blocked. Thank you. Casull 04:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

'''hi whoever you are--why do you keep re-posting incorrect info on Dr McEvilley? we feel a listing of his publications is the apropriate information to offer the public please allow me to take off the narrative stuff--it is not accurate thank you'''


 * Please do not blank large sections of articles without consensus from other editors. You can obtain this by using the talk page. If you blank again you will be blocked for disruption. Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  05:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with Corvus cornix, Casull and  Master of Puppets . I just wikified the article a few days ago to a standard structure. If you think some parts should not be mentioned in the article, please first explain on the articles talk page. -- Mdd (talk) 13:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

hi mdd talk, corvus, master of puppets and whoever else ( Dave?) seems to feel committed to keeping Thomas McEvilleys wikipedia entry both inaccurate and frankly embarrassing everything written other than a concise listing of his publications and the very brief bio above it is grossly inaccurate, out of date, and rather embarrassing Dr McEvilley is a respected author and I am sure scholars looking for info on him would be happy to find a good list of his works the only legitimate additions would be publication dates added and more entries on his journal contributions

this narrative about his family and past history ,his teaching record are absolutely not true. names, dates, institution--not correct. PLEASE allow me to edit out this narrative and keep it out this person who keeps putting it up is the vandal not me

Please tell me how to do this properly or restore my changes--I do not have time to police this site constantly but we feel it is important enough to try. thank you

Thomas McEvilley
Please take your concerns to the article's Talk page, and explain what you think is wrong. Corvus cornix talk  01:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The Talk page is at Talk:Thomas McEvilley. Corvus cornix talk  03:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * thank you! - jdb

March 2008
My apologies, I was unfamiliar with your messages on the talk page. Next time, use the edit summary to indicate what you are doing, so anyone patrolling will notice your intention. Otherwise we just see someone who is removing text. -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 04:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. 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 ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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) 04:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Corvus cornix talk  04:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Your new attact on the Thomas McEvilley page
I undid your latest strange move on the Thomas McEvilley page I still don't see "how can this info incorrect and out of date while the source confirms this? So please explain and untill them leave it like it is.

If you don't give any proof of your statements, I will assume your are objective is to vandalish Wikipedia. We assume good faith but each day Wikipedia is vandalished ten thousands of times. Editors like you have to explain yourselve. Otherwise there is nothing we can do for you. -- Mdd (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I HAVE EXPLAINED MYSELF A MILLION TIMES! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE DID YOU READ ANY OF MY POSTS? HE DOES NOT TECH AT RICE OR YALE OR ANYWHERE ELSE FOR MANY YEARS HIS FATHER WAS NOT A BANKER HIS SONS NAMES ARE NOT CORRECT AND WHY OH WHY WOULD ANYONE PUT THAT UP ANYWAY? PEOPLE NEED TO FIND HIS PUBLICATIONS BUT THEY NEVER WILL SINCE THE BIOGRAPHY PUT UP BY A MAN OFF HIS MEDS WHO ONCE WAS IN SCHOOL WITH mCeVILLEY 40 YEARS AGO IS SO LONG AND STUPID AND UNINFORMED MY GOD HE IOS ONE OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL ART CRITICS OF THE CENTUIRY WHY DO YOU ALLOW SLANDER AND LIES TO BE GENERATED ON THIS SIGHT READ THE SLOUGHT BIO FOLLOW THE LINK IT IS ONE PARAGARAPH AND SAYS NOTHING ABOUT ERRONEOUS FIRST NOVELS AND WIVES ETC. PLEASE SHOW SOME iq POINTS AND ALLOW THIS BIO TO BE CLEANED UP IF THERE ARE NO REFERENCES TO HIS FATHER FOR INSTANCE WHY ALLOW IT? HIS PUBLICATIONS ARE REFERNMECD ANYWHWRE ON THE WEB AND HIS LISTED PUBLISHER MCPHEARSON WHY LABEL ME AS A VANDEL AND NOT GO AFTER THE INSANE FOOL THAT KEEP ADDING THIS STUPIFD BIO? JDB76.15.46.220 (talk) 00:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry. You just make the impression that you are out of control. On the talk:Thomas McEvilley page I have asked you a few simple questions. -- Mdd (talk) 01:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Second warning
Stop removing parts of the article, while we are still talking about this. This kind of behavior is completely unacceptable.

If you don't do this, I will divide all my energy to get you blocked and to get the article blocked. -- Mdd (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Open discussion
I rearranged the talk:Thomas McEvilley page. You have contributed zes items for discussion. And probably you are right about most of them. But I will take them one or two at a time.

I hope this way we can solve the problems step by step. -- Mdd (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Third warning today
You have vandalized the article again. You just don't understand that we question and talk first before removing things. I will ask an administrator that you will be blocked. -- Mdd (talk) 17:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * what are you talking about?
 * I have been trying and trying to get you correct information and all you do is acuse me of vandalism?
 * can you please comunicate directly?
 * jdb17:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I have been trying to communicate with you ok? -- Mdd (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)