User talk:Musicmogul09

Whoa!
Whoa. First, see my reply on the Ryerson talk page. My role when I try mediate a dispute that has been filed in the Wikiquette forum is to help, not bully. If you're a new editor, it gives us a chance to start you off in the right direction. First, ALWAYS discuss major changes/deletions and gain consensus before single-handedly deleting large chunks of information from an article - or else it is, indeed, vandalism. Second, please be CIVIL ... edit summaries are PERMANENT, and referring to someone as a "dumbass" on a permanent record can usually get you banned. You will also be more likely to get your suggestions through if you're cooperative, rather than being combative. "Consensus", "Civility" and "Assume Good Faith" are the main keys. PS: I had no relationship with that article until this morning, even though I know a lot about the subject. BMW (drive)  16:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply, and I understand that you're both pissed off and possibly (slightly) confused. First, whether or not you properly create an edit summary or not, any time you delete massive blocks of text, it will raise suspicions of vandalism ... in fact, there are some automated bots that will AUTOMATICALLY revert, and warn you for vandalism for exactly that infraction.  Secondly, I personally believe that EVERYONE has something to add to Wikipedia (and have often been badly burned by defending this right).  I personally may be chock full of useless information, but I am not an expert on every subject - as such, everyone has more to add than I do.  The only complaint is how to do those edits.  An article that has contained certain information for months/years/weeks has attained some degree of consensus, so massive edits run contrary to consensus - as such, I recommended to you that you discuss massive changes in advance.  Whether you like the fact that your undiscussed edit was reverted never gives anyone the right to act uncivilly .. in fact, I think they were pretty tame with you, all things considered.  Look, I think you have a lot of good things to do and say on Wikipedia, just please, for the sake of the entire project (and your own blood pressure) just do things the right way ... and yes, your suggestions may not be accepted, but at least they've been heard (like on any courtroom drama...and trust me, this place is full of drama)  BMW  (drive)  22:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nom of Chris Avenir
I've nominated Chris Avenir for deletion; please offer your comments here. Thanks! --Alinnisawest,Dalek Empress ( extermination requests here ) 22:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. it isn't that notable on its own Musicmogul09 (talk) 22:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Ontario College of Art & Design
Regarding your addition to the above article, the onus is on you to provide reliable sources. Without such sources, the information can not be included. The JPS talk to me  22:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Ryerson
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 23:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked for a period of 31 hours for disruptive editing along with edit warring on Ryerson University. To contest this block please place below. Tiptoety talk 04:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/Musicmogul09 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.  freshacconci  speak to me  02:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)