User talk:HeadMouse/Archive 2

Walt Disney World Monorail System
Your first action back from your block was this edit. You have been told over and over again that Wikipedia's Manual of Style determines the correct capitalisation of section titles. Please refrain from any further violations. --Yamla 21:26, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * CALM DOWN Gees!!! It's fixed. you could have simply fixed it instead of reverting it. try reading a discussion page once in a while. HeadMouse 21:28, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem is that you had already been told about this over and over again. Just fixing it clearly is not sufficient to get you to read and understand our policies and guidelines.  --Yamla 21:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * IT WAS A DAMN TYPE'O CALM THE HELL DOWN GEES!!!!!!!HeadMouse 21:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Monorail Card.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Monorail Card.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Metros 01:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Monorail Card.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Monorail Card.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Metros 01:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It is a promotional photo from an advertisement, press kit, or other promotional source.

Then after that you have to choose a Licensing: which is LOGO. So whats the problem? I followed the template exact. HeadMouse 01:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Walt Disney World Monorail System
Considering your previous blocks, I will spare you the standard warning messages. However, you persistent changes to Walt Disney World Monorail System are on the threshold of WP:3RR and WP:OWN violations. As your obstinate behavior and refusal to accept community consensus is increasingly disruptive to the project, I expect your next block will be ... even longer. I urge you to re-consider your actions and work collaboratively with your fellow editors. --Kralizec! (talk) 02:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't hand me that crap. I am not violating the 3RRR rule. I am not reverting anything back to a previous form. I am trying to make it meet your standards. thats called editing. In fact Metros is th eone in violation of said rule. he has reverted every edit I made to the title back to the previous version. And I will tell you once more I DO NOT CLAIM TO OWN THIS ARTICLE so stop with that crap too.HeadMouse 02:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you read the official policy on WP:3RR ... ? It states in part:

An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period. A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time.

Please note the "undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time" part.


 * 1st revert: 08:06, 5 October 2007
 * 2nd revert: 16:26, 5 October 2007
 * 3rd revert: 20:44, 5 October 2007
 * 4th revert: 20:58, 5 October 2007
 * 5th revert: 21:13, 5 October 2007

Please stop disrupting the project and instead work collaboratively with your fellow editors. --Kralizec! (talk) 02:27, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

THOSE ARE CALLED EDITS not reverts. there is a difference. re·vert     /rɪˈvɜrt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-vurt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used without object) 1.	to return to a former habit, practice, belief, condition, etc.

Since I did not return to a former condition it is not a revert. Metros however DID return to a former condition. I simply made different changes to try and please WP. HeadMouse 02:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, as noted above, a revert is defined as "undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time." You may attempt to disguise your actions by rules lawyering, but the facts -and the article's edit history- speak for themselves.  --Kralizec! (talk) 02:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I undid it like he asked DROP IT and get off my back HeadMouse 02:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well the issue that Kralizec! sees here (and I wholeheartedly agree with it) is that this happens again and again with you. Sure, you undid it now...but what happens in a few days?  A few weeks?  Do you start reverting again like that?  He's trying to show you what you're doing is wrong and it needs to stop.  Metros 02:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * In a few days, week,s whatever, nothing will change. You all will still be stuck up power hungry snobs. I will still be trying to share information and you will still keep deleting it. So is the life in the screwed up land of Wikipedia. 66.82.9.82 17:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
Due to your chronic edit warring, incivility, and WP:OWN issues, you have now been blocked for six months. I am sorry it had to come to this but this is your eighth block and you have not shown any significant improvement despite these numerous blocks. --Yamla 17:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You have no right to block me I broke no rules. As for the comments being signed by an IP address instead of my name. the computer I was on would not let me log in, and when I used the 4 ~'s it showed the IP address instead. Again I will tell you I DO NOT CLAIM TO OWN THIS ARTICLE I wish you would get that through your head. I was asked to undo the lat change I made and so I did. This block is unjustified. HeadMouse 19:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)