User talk:Boondocks37

Welcome
Hello, Boondocks37, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 18:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Can somebody please look at my autoblock, as is talked about above? Auburnpilot would not unblock it, because he felt a 24 hour block was appropriate for making the same edit twice. But, my autoblock was for one week. It was given without warning or explanation. Please either unblock me, or give an explanation why I was blocked for one week. Thanks.


 * Autoblocks don't last for a week.—WAvegetarian (talk) 04:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

helpme OK, then this is not an "autoblock", as I am still blocked after more than 24 hours, and the block message says I am blocked for a full week. Can this please be reviewed by somebody? Does the punishment fit the crime, or did bias come into the decision to block me for a week, without explanation?
 * Maybe you are editing under a shared IP address? Miranda 00:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Give it a try now. -  auburn pilot  talk  00:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Great, my block has now been cleared. Thanks for all the help.

Misconstrue

 * "The title of the reference is "Tory bill aimed at cutting greenhouse gases in half by 2050"... and you feel I misconstrued it? What part of this is confusing you?"

I'm not confused, and based on this, and your less than civil comment at User talk:Raul654 (diff), I don't believe that you're here to help positively build the encyclopedia.

But instead of blocking you for your trolling, incivil comments, I decided that I'm going to bring this to a wider discussion for a community ban. (Note that by reverting your edit, I intentionally placed myself in a position where I won't likely be personally blocking you. So I'll be happy to continue this discussion as "just-another-editor".)

As for the edit in question (Which I'll be reverting shortly), the article touches on several points, including the bill in question. However your assertion of what was stated is simply inaccurate.

I hope this clarifies. - jc37 07:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

An ANI thread about you
There is a thread at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents about you. DuncanHill (talk) 15:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Election
If you want to contribute to Canadian federal election, 2008, please note the following: Any contributions you make that don't follow Wikipedia's rules around formatting and writing tone can and will continue to be reverted from the article. An evaluation of the leadership issue in this election is perfectly valid if written and formatted properly, but what you've been writing is Conservative talking points, not a neutral summary. Bearcat (talk) 17:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Contributions must be written from a neutral point of view — yours have consistently been written from a deeply partisan anti-Liberal and pro-Conservative spin that is absolutely inappropriate in a neutral encyclopedia article.
 * 2) We don't need detailed transcripts of entire interviews; we only require a summary of the main points.
 * 3) You need to follow proper referencing format. Do not insert a substantial list of external links directly into the body text; link to one, or at most two, newspaper articles about the statement, and enclose that link within tags.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. JQF • Talk • Contribs 21:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The project's content policies require that all articles be written from a neutral point of view, and not introduce bias or give undue weight to viewpoints. Please bear this in mind when making edits such as your recent edit to Canadian federal election, 2008. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Double Blue (Talk) 21:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Just state the sourced facts and let the reader decide for himself rather than putting your own analysis on it. Thanks, Double Blue  (Talk) 21:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Warning
I very much agree with DoubleBlue's comment in this edit summary. There are legitimate differences of interpretation of WP:NPOV, and then there's what you're doing. Stop it. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 03:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)