User talk:Fallman123

June 2008
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons. Toddst1 (talk) 05:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Tom Green's House Tonight has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: 'youtube\.com' (link(s): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbYs37ptjxM)) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image or a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 05:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

3RR is 3RR. Article was Tom Green's House Tonight. One of the reverts was against XLinkBot. Think about it. Toddst1 (talk) 05:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

This was because I incorrectly referenced the source and it thought I was spamming. The warning said in itself I was free to revert it's revision if it was in error.
 * This was a poor block. The user was not adequately warned, made only 3 reversions (one was reverted by a bot), and the user was reverted by the admin who blocked him. I fully support unblock with a full explanation to the user of why the edits were inappropriate. The Evil Spartan (talk) 07:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Just as an additional note, and as a former editor who left due to the harsh actions by admins, even though I do now understand why Toddst1 disapproved, I disagree strongly with the position that Wikipedia has of admins/editors taking action on articles whose subject matter they don't understand. The article I was blocked for I linked video evidence of my claim that Mr. Green had publicly acknowledged that 4chan was targeting him and that he was getting irritated. It is also common knowledge among the people who watch Mr. Green's show that it regularly gets pranked by these people. Encyclopedia Dramatica, 4chan's unofficial wiki, has a very unflattering article about Green with links to dozens of meme-related pranks that "Anonymous" has pulled. If Hal Turner can get a mention about 4chan in his article, is there any reason why my edits were so vehemently rejected? One would think when the person the article is covering publicly states that a group has been pranking his show for a year, most people would believe him. You can also google "Tom Green" and "4chan" for additional evidence that it's a very notable trend among "anonymous". I am very unhappy to still see wikiadmins taking action on edits and other subject matter they don't understand. Toddst1 automatically assumed hockeysfuture was a blog, what he doesn't know is that notable media personalities such as Bob MacKenzie of TSN and Pierre McGuire are frequent readers of the online magazine and have contributed to them in the form of forum posts. It's one of the most reliable and respected sources for information on young hockey players on the net. Ask one of the editors in the wiki hockey project that we had going here and they would have never reverted my edit saying Hedman was one of the top prospects going into the 2009 draft. --Fallman123 (talk) 08:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)