User talk:89.32.1.82/archive1

Regarding current block
I have been blocked under the motivation of disruption. That means i have questioned the validity of a warning an admin added here just for feeling insulted by a certain comment of mine . I have politely asked those who considered a rude and disrepectful comment to bring strong arguments to support their opinion yet no one made any effort to do so. Instead i was blocked for disruption. I have tried to remain civil in these issue yet it did not seem to matter. Under these circumstances i consider this a typical example of abusive blocking until anyone can strongly prove otherwise.89.32.1.82 19:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

ok, since it seems no one has anything to object against the above mentioned paragraph, soon after i'll be able to archive this page i will realize a detailed analysis of this block to illustrate this typical example of admin abuse89.32.1.82 05:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia User Talk Page Policy (please read this first)

 * Deleting the comments of other users from article Talk pages, aside from removal of internal spam, or deleting entire sections of talk pages, is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long Talk page to a separate file and then remove the text from the main Talk page. The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing, especially where the intention of the removal is to mislead other editors.

i have added this in order to avoid futile arguments and potential admin abuses.89.32.1.82 18:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Happy editing day
me wishes myself a happy editing day!!

Further notice

 * Note that removing a part of a signed comment is not the same as deleting an entire signed comment and is not permitted. Nor is altering another person's signed comment which this user has done several times.  Additionally, removing current warnings is not permitted.  This message is (at this time) a current warning.  A message indicating this IP's country of origin is not a current warning, however.  --Yamla 19:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

note that the situation is not as bad as the above mentioned message tends to suggest it.89.32.1.82 16:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Silent Hunter III
Thank you for experimenting with the page Talk:Silent Hunter III on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Yamla 19:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC) well, thank you very much for the encouragement

can i experiment some more ?


 * Yes, so long as you use the sandbox. --Yamla 19:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Adria
Please stop adding your personal opinions to Adria's article. Matthew  Fenton ( contribs ) 18:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

well, i don't think it's a personal opinion as it is shared by a large majority. lol.

It is still your opinion, please see WP:NPOV, saying she is cute is point of view. Matthew Fenton (  contribs )  18:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

then where do i add my point of view?


 * You dont add your point of view here. Matthew  Fenton  ( contribs ) 14:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You can add your point of view to your user page, which can be found at User:89.32.1.82. — Reinyday, 23:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during July 21 2006 (UTC)
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits. Matthew  Fenton  ( contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 19:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I HAVE PERSONALLY ADDED THAT CONTENT and since i have highly criticized for further editing i am only removing what i have added before as it seems my contributions are no longer desirable. i believe it is my right. U gonna call me a vandal for deleting my own contribution?
 * No its not. Read the text below the box "You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL." ;-) Matthew <b style="color:#3366ff;"> Fenton  (</b> contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 19:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

u didn't have to tell me twice.
 * You made two replies, so i told you twice. ;-) Matthew <b style="color:#3366ff;"> Fenton  (</b> contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 19:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during July 21 2006 (UTC) to Adria (Stargate)
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

PLEASE STOP VANDALIZING MY USER DISCUSSION PAGE. I GOT THE POINT89.32.1.82 21:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I haven't blanked any warning. i just made them visible because with the actual template they are not normally visible

hmmm > If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits.  Matthew <b style="color:#3366ff;"> Fenton  (</b> contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 20:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

last warning
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. we have awnsered your questions, and now we have had it. You are very close to breaching the 3rr. Please stop adding your opinions in articles, or you will be banned. Thanks. 89.32.1.82 21:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Please Stop vandalizing my user discussion page. I got your point.


 * Reverting your page when you blank warnings is not vandalism unless you have come to an agreement with those who have added the templates due to a misunderstanding. You may, however, archive your talk page if you wish. EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 21:30, July 21, 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi. I don't think people are trying to vandalize your talk page.  Instead, they are trying to inform you that you are breaking Wikipedia policies. — Reinyday, 23:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Explanation of problem with talk page
The problem was that someone deleted the closing portion of some non-display syntax, which blanked out the bottom of your page. In other words, the formatting got messed up. I have fixed it.&mdash;WAvegetarian&bull;(talk) 14:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I include also among the problems the last two warnings of user Fenton which i consider to be abusive use of the vandalism accusation. How do i get them removed?89.32.1.82 14:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Have you tried having a civil conversation with Fenton? That is what I would suggest first. I don't personally think it is worth the bother.There are many other warnings here. I'd just let them be.&mdash;WAvegetarian&bull;(talk) 14:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, i will remove myself the warnings since one of them is already useless as user Fenton edited himself the changes i wanted to do. Pointless likewise is the last warning as he cannot convincingly prove the reason for reverting my changes.89.32.1.82 14:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to continue here since you have even though it now seems to have detoured from the original section title. Anyway, again, I wouldn't worry about the last warning template. Especially on IP pages, time is a healer of many wounds. If you haven't been warned in a week you most likely won't get blocked for what one person thinks is You may archive this talk page, or ask me to. This will make the warning no longer display here. The only way to have it actually removed is to get Fenton to retract it or convince someone else that it was left in bad faith, which I doubt. I see that you have gotten into a spat with Qho and Fenton. I urge you to heed what Shane said below about being civil. I know that Qho has been pushing it as well, so you don't need to complain about them to me. Another thing you can do is register an account. If you do this, you will never have to see this page again. Furthermore, no one will know you are connected with it. If you get an account and follow the civil advice that Fenton gave you there won't be any more vandalism warnings. I have included a stock welcome message below that contains helpful links. I'm sorry that your first experiences with Wikipedia have gone so poorly.&mdash;WAvegetarian&bull;(talk) 23:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

Currently, you are editing without a username. You can continue to do so, as you are not required to log in to Wikipedia to read and edit articles; however, logging in will result in a username being shown instead of your IP address (yours is 89.32.1.82). Logging in does not require any personal details, and there are many other benefits for logging in.

When you edit pages:


 * Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
 * Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
 * Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such content or editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. For now, if you are stuck, you can click the edit this page tab above, type <tt> </tt> in the edit box, and then click Save Page; an experienced Wikipedian will be around shortly to answer any questions you may have. Also feel free to ask a question on. I will answer your questions as far as I can! Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia.&mdash;WAvegetarian&bull;(talk) 23:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Gents, calm down. The internet provides annominity. Not hostility. See also WP:CIVIL. --Shane (talk/contrib) 19:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL
The mistake on your userpage was a mistake. Even I have added warnings to the main user page before, but please just end it. Your actions have not yet cost you to be blocked from editing, but if it gets heated, and admin will step in. Try to be WP:CIVIL. That is all I can say. Thanks. --Shane (talk/contrib) 21:06, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

please state who are you adressing to.89.32.1.82 11:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

i don't care who this qho guy is, but as long as he does to have serious lack of civilized behaviour i will treat him accordingly. regarding the "i know who you are" he thinks in his ignorance that an ip is the same thing as a person. idiot. 89.32.1.82 11:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Who ever 89.32.1.82is doesent bother me but he is getting on my nerves. I already tried to settle a dispute with him but he keeps going on about it. This is the last straw. If there is any more from him I will take matters into my own hands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qho (talk • contribs)

on the contrary, it seems you were very interested in the problem of my identity which you corelated with personal threats thus suggesting me you intent to settle the problem face to face. i have only treated your statements accordingly.89.32.1.82 15:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I did not care about who you were I just care of how things are written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qho (talk • contribs)

HEY
I AM SORRY BUT I DID NOT MEAN WHAT ALL I SAID.

CAN I HAVE YOUR VIRTUAL HAND SHAKE?

AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE IT PLEASE ADD YOUR ACCOUNT TO MY FRIEND LIST.

--Qho 23:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I still don't understand what the problem was. Of course you don't expect me to just say "oh, it's nothing" after making such obvious threats by suggesting you supposedly know my identity. The only resolution i can accept at this moment for this vehement attacks is a face to face meeting to iron out this problem (that should not be a problem for you as you seem very eager to that). however, current circumstances render this meeting very unlikely to occur in the near future and even it will, i'm afraid you won't survive it. And also i would like to know if you would be that brave if i'd be standing next to you as you type, pluck your teeth and use them to enhance your keyboard.89.32.1.82 11:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during July 24 2006 (UTC) to Talk:Adria (Stargate)
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits. Matthew <b style="color:#3366ff;"> Fenton  (</b> contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 12:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to remove warning messages from your talk page, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. MER-C 13:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

never mind. after all, we should tolerate spiteful persons too even though they annoy us.89.32.1.82 13:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

TREES!!!!
I did not mean what I said so just drop the fight and go tripping along with your merry short life. --Qho 15:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

and to your general knowledge my name is not dan. i wouldn't rely too much solely on the information an ip can offer.89.32.1.82 15:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Your dealings with User:Qho
You're both in violation of WP:CIVIL already. I suggest that both of you drop the matter immediately or your editing privileges may be revoked. Thank you, Misza 13 T C 16:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

to both? that's not fair. he started flaming up old issues i considered to be solved. Moreover, he's clearly vandalizing my user page. Look at his contribution history.89.32.1.82 16:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Additionally, you are not permitted to change someone else's signed comments even if they are on this page. I'm not taking a stand and stating that Qho has done nothing wrong here, only warning you that this is considered serious vandalism and asking you to please not do it again.  --Yamla 16:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

additionally, that statement is futile and not of general importance so i removed it. moreover it does imply an uncivilized threat i do not tolerate any more. and by the way what does blocked refer to? 89.32.1.82 16:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

You have been blocked for 24 hours for changing another user's signed comments after being warned. --Yamla 16:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Enough. Any more blanking of parts of signed comments and I'll protect this page and extend the block.  If you feel Qho is personally attacking you (and thus violating WP:NPA, let me or another admin know which specific comments you take issue with and we'll remove them.  But do not change Qho's comments any further.  --Yamla 17:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked refers to Wikipedia preventing you from editing any other pages until your block expires. We don't generally block you from editing your user page or discussion page but that may also happen.  --Yamla 17:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I take issue with the comment of my location. User Qho made great efforts to affirm he knows my identity even on my user page. Therefore i consider this mentioning provocative and efforts to worsen the situation.There is no need for anyone to use it especielly when it does involve threats.89.32.1.82 17:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Your block has been extended to 48 hours and this page will be protected from editing. You were warned and previously blocked for altering other people's signed comments.  --Yamla 17:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

A seemingly case of vandalism
User Pilotguy, i am acting within my right conferred by the WP:VAND to delete user commnets. I have removed no warnings. However, you keep reverting my changes. Unless you can provide a satisfactory explanation of your action i will consider your attitude as vandalism.89.32.1.82 19:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You may wish to review WP:TPG -- Pilotguy (<b style="color:#0000FF;">roger that</b>) 19:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

i have reviewed it and i am still within my rights conferred by the WP:VAND. So, please stop reverting changes where i have deleted NO WARNINGS otherwise i will regard your attitude as vandalism.89.32.1.82 19:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

i think he got the point :)).89.32.1.82 19:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Removing current warnings
As previously noted, you are not permitted to remove current warnings from this page. Bugs5382/Shane's plea for you to remain civil is one such example. --Yamla 19:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

as you have remarked, it is a plea and not an EXPLICIT WARNING with the appropriate templates.89.32.1.82 19:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Doesn't matter. The point is that it is a warning to you (and others) to remain civil.  Removing it may be taken by others as an indication that you have not been informed about WP:CIVIL.  It's not just warning templates that must remain, it is any current warning.  --Yamla 19:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, you would be allowed to remove it and all other content on this page if you created an archive of this page. --Yamla 19:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

i do not consider qho's reply to me deleting his comment(trees2) as a warning therefore i will remove it.89.32.1.82 19:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds reasonable to me. Just make sure you delete the whole signed comment and don't leave bits of it around.  I'd still much prefer you archive your talk page (and in general, this is the course of action strongly recommended by Wikipedia) but it is your choice.  --Yamla 19:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Issue Resolution
And so i deleted Qho's pestering comments. Since he is blocked too i have no concerns about him retyping his comments and restarting the conflict. Soon i'll archive my talk page and thus this conflict will end.89.32.1.82 19:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

89.32.1.82 17:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * In a few minutes, my block should be expiring now:)
 * more exactly, in 4 minutes, it'll be over.


 * and so.89.32.1.82 17:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Back into the civilized world
In this moment, my block has just expired.89.32.1.82 17:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

me wishes myself a happy editing day!!

i will also be more than glad to remove the block template.89.32.1.82 17:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

now that's better, ain't it?89.32.1.82 17:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Spelling corrections
You said: "hello, my block has just expired and this is my first edit on other pages. well, i considered quite fit that the first edit since my blocking should be made here:) Oh, by the way, i have altered user's pilotguy comment to correct a spelling error. he said "you way want to bla bla " whilst the correct form is "you may". i found this spelling error disturbing but if you consider it inappropriate i will revert it."
 * You are absolutely not permitted to alter another user's signed comments, even to correct a spelling mistake. If it bothers you, let that user know and have him or her correct the problem.  That said, my opinion is that the spirit of this policy is not being violated in this case.  --Yamla 18:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

ok, then please revert the changes. i have announced that guy on his talk page to do so.89.32.1.82 18:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I find your comments, such as, nothing short of rude and disrespectful. If you continue you will be blocked for disruption. -- Pilotguy (<b style="color:#0000FF;">roger that</b>) 18:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

this is your personal opinion and i will advise you to bring additional arguments to support that they are rude and disrepectful. otherwise i will consider YOUR present comment as an instingative and provocative.ok? Till you can demonstrate the rude and disrepectful nature of that comment, i will ignore this. 89.32.1.82 18:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * No, PilotGuy is correct. You are required to remain civil at all times on Wikipedia. This is not personal opinion, it is a rule of editing here. Thanks, Gwernol 18:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

No, sorry. Unless you can demonstrate me that by posting a personal opinion on my user talk page in which i express my belief he got the point i broke the rule of civility, i shall still consider this warning unwarranted.89.32.1.82 18:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, you can consider it whatever you like. I'm telling you that I (as an admin) consider your comment uncivil; I also consider PilotGuy's warning to you to be valid. Particularly given your recent history of behavior, you should be a little more careful how you edit. Gwernol 18:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. You have brought no arguments to support your opinion and the quality of admin is not a guarantee to back up the uncivil nature of my comment. In this situation, i may consider your attitude as abusive.89.32.1.82 18:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Enough
You have been warned that disruption is a blockable offense but continued this behaviour nonetheless. Thus, your editing privileges have been revoked for another span of 48 hours. Misza 13 T C 18:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like i have been blocked again. Yet no one has convincingly argued me that i have broken the rules of civility by politely questioning the validity of a warning. I have also been disrupted by user pilotguy's comments and tried to solve the issue politely and civil. i do not believe asking someone to argue his opinion should be regarded as disruption and uncivility. under this circumstances, until someone proves otherwise, i will regard this block as abusive.89.32.1.82 18:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

anyways, let's see if i can archive my page.89.32.1.82 19:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

looks like i couldn't.89.32.1.82 19:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Once your block is lifted (i.e. don't do this right away please) you can copy your talkpage to User talk:89.32.1.82/archive. Please make sure you add a link to the archive to the top of your talkpage, thanks! :) <i style="color:#FF00FF;">~Kylu ( u | t ) </i> 01:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

don't u think i tried to do this already? but i was blocked and so i couldn't.89.32.1.82 08:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

i could use some help with my status page though.89.32.1.82 08:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

ok, my block should expire in a few hours.89.32.1.82 13:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Countdown
So, the time of my block end draws near.89.32.1.82 14:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

and nearer every hour.89.32.1.82 15:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

nearer.89.32.1.82 17:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

ok. half of hour left89.32.1.82 18:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

ok, let's archive now.89.32.1.82 18:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)