User talk:Atticus765

pop punk
Atticus, why do you insist My Chemical Romance is pop punk? They are not nor have they ever been. Show me the online review or bio that claims this and you can keep it in and I will admit I am wrong. Until then, do not add it back in. Madangry 19:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Atticus, there is no way I'm going to play a stupid delete/vandalize/delete/vandalize game with you. I give up and I still say you're dead wrong--you have not yet verfied nor proven that My Chemical Romance play pop-infused punk rock music and I doubt that you ever will. Adding items that cannot be verified is vandalism. Madangry 20:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Please don't go changing genres at a whim. The Beatles article for example is a Featured Article, and I'm sure you're not the first person to suggest 'classic rock' but 'pop/rock' is what was settled on and that's how it will stay. Please also note that "classic rock" is something of a neologism and quite US-centric; they weren't classic at the time, they were just a (very successful) rock and pop band. We can generally do a lot better than such terms as 'classic rock'. --kingboyk 20:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Jimi Hendrix. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. -- Syrthiss 20:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Stop removing the genres from band articles. Read a book or ride a bike or do something productive with your time. If you continue vandalizing Wikipedia pages, you will be blocked from further editing. --HarryCane 20:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --kingboyk 20:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and repeated and blatant violation of WP:NPOV are considered vandalism. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. --kingboyk 20:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Block Evasion
I have extended your block an additional week because you evaded it using Itunes666; see the evidence on that user page. If you continue to evade your block, the duration will only increase. I strongly recommend you calm down, find another activity, and wait patiently. Superm401 - Talk 06:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You edited again with User:Apple765 (that account has been blocked indefinitely). I am extending your block again for a week.  Do not edit until the block on User:Atticus765 expires or you may be blocked indefinitely. Superm401 - Talk 17:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I've now blocked you indefinitely for continued block evasion and lack of any communication about your edits. I have placed a notice on WP:AN asking for review, if you have any comments you may make them here (I will be watching this page) or you may email me (via the link from my userpage). Petros471 10:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)