User talk:Moonbatssuck

October 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 350.org, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ► RATEL ◄ 00:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

350.org
The fliers were not part of the 350.org campaign. Adding that to the page is vandalism. Stop immediately. ► RATEL ◄ 00:36, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ratel
Please, help me eliminate the vandalism on the Taxpayer March on Washington page. We can't have an entire section with pictures about signs that the organizers did not organize. Those signs were not part of the FreedomWorks protest. I expect you to be there, cleaning up this vandalism, ASAP. --Moonbatssuck (talk) 01:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on 350.org. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. ► RATEL ◄ 01:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Taxpayer March on Washington, you will be blocked from editing.  APK  because, he says, it's true  02:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Notification
Hello,. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.  APK  because, he says, it's true  16:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. Cut out the disingenuous (read: untrue) citing of Ratel's agreement when he is clearly against your opinion. Do this again, you will be blocked for disruption. Tan   &#124;   39  16:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Tan, cut out the disingenuous (read: untrue) citing of Ratel's disagreement when he is clearly in agreement with my opinion. Do this again, you will be blocked from my adoration due your foolishness.

Where did Ratel disagree with anything I cited him as saying? Have a verifiable source of me saying he said anything he did not? If not, please don't call me disingenuous. Much love,--Moonbatssuck (talk) 16:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, a quick look at his talk page history and the edits therein shows you and him are not exactly best buds. A little insignificant Help, it's almost Halloween! AAH! 17:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * That's just your interpretation of events! Ratel and I have been on the mission to clear off unofficial demonstrations signs since... yesterday.  True, he tried to take them off a liberal group's advertioral and I tried to take them off a conservative group's article.  But that just means that I'm reaching across the partisan divide and trying to work together.  But alas, Ratel's hand will only work on articles that agree with him (and will keep doing so until they agree completely).  I consider Ratel to be my closest Wikipedian bud, ever!  --Moonbatssuck (talk) 17:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I still want to hear from Ratel on his interpretation of events - I have some suspicions that not everything you are doing here is in good faith. I could very well be mistaken. Until we hear from Ratel, consider my warning above struck. Tan   &#124;   39  17:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Tan. Keep it real in WikiWorld. --Moonbatssuck (talk) 17:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Blocked
Your account is blocked indefinitely because it appears you are importing an off-wiki criminal harassment campaign into Wikipedia. Jehochman Talk 18:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Additionally, your username is offensive, as it is a thinly veiled reference to "liberals", which seems to be your M.O. per this edit summary. You've also be sanitizing a right wing article by removing properly sourced negative material.  On the whole your contribution pattern is virtually 100% disruptive. Wikipedia is not for political battles.  Please take your approach to another site, such as a blog, where it may be welcomed.  If you'd like to edit Wikipedia, please explain how your contributions will be different going forward, and suggest a new username. Jehochman Talk 18:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Off-wiki?
What does that mean?


 * Off-wiki means in real life. There's an ongoing battle between liberals and conservatives.  We editors do not want any part of it.  Please don't bring that fight here.  Either you can edit neutrally, or not at all. Your username suggests that "Moonbats" (a/k/a liberals) "Suck".  We do not allow usernames that desparage other users.  I'd block somebody who had the username "YankeesSuck" if they started trouble at the Derek Jeter article.  You are welcome to start a new account with a better username.  If you do, please don't continue to battle.  Most likely you should avoid controversial subjects until you become more familiar with how things work here. Jehochman Talk 19:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I created a new username as suggested by Jehochman. I will try to do all of you right by this one. Love always, --Idetestlunarbats (talk) 21:03, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Because of your refusal to change to a neutral username as well as continued disruption, I have now hardblocked this account. MuZemike 00:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)