User talk:December 21, 2012

Your recent edits to Algiers
Hello. As you keep reverting my revets to the Algiers article, I tought I should contact you. Well, that article is currently a rough, it is full of mistakes, and is as you can probably see, a machine-translated text (from the French Wikipedia), so this article isn't presentable as it is for the public. You must know, Wikipedia is one of the most visited website on the internet. If you can make this article better (as you just said "it needs some work", feel free to edit the user subpage/sandbox I made for you by clicking here. If you succesfully make a usable article of it, feel free to add it to the real page again. Sincerly, --escon dites  17:49, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * So, If you can not fix these articles right now, couldn't you leave the correct versions as they are untill you made a better version? --escon dites  07:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to American Pie. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. '' Copyrighted lyrics absolutely cannot be added to Wikipedia unless under GDFL-compatible licensure. Please do not restore these.

Also, the interpretation that was added (whatever the source) constitutes original research (please read of you are unfamiliar with this one), and cannot be kept. Several more or less authoritative interpretations are linked from American Pie, and Rich Kulawiec's is linked twice. Long quotes from Kulawiec or anyone else are not encyclopedic, and not needed. / edg ☺ ☭ 09:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

One more thing: please do not edit war in articles I watch. I am quick to report sockpuppets. / edg ☺ ☭ 10:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/Kitia (2nd) for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:19, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Priestley House
While I am flattered by your nomination of Joseph Priestley House at WP:FAC, the article is not yet ready for FAC (no peer review, still adding material). I am also puzzled as you have made zero edits to the article. Would you be OK with withdrawing the nomination? Thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request

 * Please do not remove my edit declining your request. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It looks like User talk:Kitia was blocked because you kept making unblock requests no matter how many people declined, is that correct? Do you see any similarity between what you did on that talk page, and what you're doing now?  Based on your prior experience, can you predict what the most likely thing to happen here next is? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well what am I supposed to do? It was protected because Sandstein, after I posted a legitamate remark, simply pressed the rollback button and protected it. I AM INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! December 21, 2012 (talk) 01:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This was the edit immediately prior to protection. No legitimate remark here, just an attempt to cheat the unblock request process. -- Kinu t /c  01:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC) Oh, you mean the protection of User_talk:Kitia... the user of which you are an admitted sockpuppet. I see no legitimate remark that was wrongly reverted. -- Kinu  t /c  01:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)