User talk:Blombardo

October 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page PhpBB has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. 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. Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Please do not make test edits to articles, as you did with this edit to PhpBB, even if you intend to fix them later. Such edits constitute vandalism, and will be reverted. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see the article's talk page -- I have responded to your last comment to indicate why your edits are being reverted. Please do not continue in this vein. Thank you! Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to PhpBB. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you cannot figure out how to send a message or make edits to a talk page (which seems unlikely -- you've posted to the article's discussion page) then you should not be adding whole new sections to articles. Learn how to properly format and edit new content before posting it, otherwise it will be removed. That's the rules. I absolutely encourage you to post your content to the talk page to inquire about anybody else aiding in formatting it. I'm definitely not reverting your content because of the content's validity (I have no opinion on that front). I think you are trying to contribute positively so I sincerely hope that you try and contribute your content in a way that is usable. Thank you. Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Talk pages are the way we Wikipedians discuss improvements to articles. On the top of the page there is a link that reads "Talk", you can click on it, and add a comment just as you would edit an article. I see your edits, and I find them to be in conflict with WP:GUIDE, a Wikipedia policy. If you wish to discuss it, please go to the talk page. Thank you. - RUL3R *trolling *vandalism 06:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow I just utterly hate this communication system - the editing rules make it completely impossible to read while editing...

1: I don't appreciate being accused of 'vandalizing' because thats not my intent.

2: I have no use for the sandbox; its a useless empty thing with no tutorials attached. There is no way to learn how to make a new section- how to tie it into the table of contents on top - its all just a big pile of confusing CODE that I don't understand. The 'guide to editing' was helpful - but its not exactly a user friendly system... the page that loads has got TWENTY PAGES OF CODE I HAVE NEVER SEEN BEFORE!!!!! I have no clue where to begin - why cant there be a simpler format!!! (like MS WORD or Open Office - or ANY other word processor on my PC...)

3: I am not making a test edit - I have no desire to come back later to change things - honestly after this past THREE hours of messing around I have a mind to not ever return here (but thats just because I'm upset with how difficult this place is to contribute to)

4: I still have no clue how to respond to a person - or what this edit is going to prove or who can see it...

5: That someone sent me for the 'wp' whatever - the policies thing - is just a big pile of info that has nothing to do with me - or the edit I did to that post. There is nothing in there that has any remote hint of describing me or what I'm doing... --

Blombardo (talk) 07:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. 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. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. --SineBot (talk) 06:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Your "Final" Edit
You nailed formatting, you didn't violate the same bit of WP:NOT. I have an issue with reputable source. You are linking to a post you made on a message board, which is clearly not a reputable source (surely you must agree -- you seem rational, hehe). I may edit your post and remove the second sentence which links to your message board posting. This is going to remove your list of portal options. If your posting of options on a message board is the only source you have for these options, they cannot be included in Wikipedia. Please do not be frustrated by this. Removing this is no reflection on the validity of your information. It is policy, and policy I should hope you find agreeable (obviously, "some guy" posting on a message board isn't exactly a reputable source of information, regardless of how valid the information might be). Ginsengbomb (talk) 07:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

The post I linked to was my post -which is not biased and shouldnt be removed- and if you read my post it is: 1: on the official forum that the topic is about. 2: it lists the only two official topics where the official leaders of phpbb discussed portals (years ago) - those topics are on the same forum as the post. 3: it is validated by staff of the forum; referring to the fact that there is and never was any official phpbb portal.

Why is this a problem?

I would have linked to one of the other 2 official posts -- but they were long ago locked and there was no way for me to link the list of portals.

My entire goal - my sole purpose - is to share a list of available portals. THIS IS THE ONLY REASON I'm here doing this. I wasted many many many hours trying to find a good phpbb portal - and I want my research to help some other internet newbie. Blombardo (talk) 07:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)