User talk:Shultz/Runins

My new "run ins" with some people. This is a type of Archive.

Sandbox stuff
I raked it out because the sandbox is an innapropriate place to post information that has been deemed innapropriate for an article, the sandbox is a place for testing new things, if you want a place to rework content so that it can be used in the article you can make use of the preview button to do it in the article before putting the edit through, or you can create a subpage of your userpage i.e. to temporarly do the work in and then when your done you can put it onto the article and either keep the subpage or ask an admin  to delete it for you (only admins can delete pages), my issue wasn't with your content however it was where you posted it and I have no view one way or another on whether your content deserves to be in the article or not, btw, the term rake is used  somewhat as a pun since the test area is called the sandbox clearing out the sandbox is often called raking the sandbox :). If you have any questions feel free to drop a note on my user page or you can email me or catch me on IRC at #wikipedia on irc.freenode.net. Jtkiefer T - 02:48, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Vanity
Please stop adding vanity entries to wikipedia articles. --fvw *  04:46, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

ROFL!!! Wakeenah thought you didn't have a sense of humor and I agree. Besides, I'll just think the fact that you don't have a sense of humor is funny unless you're an admin I guess. --Shultz 04:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Please stop harassing FvW, who, FYI, is an admin. --MarkSweep 04:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I guess that explains how he's able to "watch" articles about every single day of the year! How was I supposed to know in the first place that he's an admin? --Shultz 04:54, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who or what he is, just don't go around harassing people, Ok? Thanks, --MarkSweep 04:57, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Ok, Mark. I'll try not to.

A question yet to receive an answer: How was I supposed to know that he's an admin in the first place? --Shultz 04:59, 17 August 2005 (UTC)


 * You weren't supposed to. Admins are just trusted users with a few extra buttons for housekeeping, there's no special point in knowing who is and who isn't. You might be be surprised at how many kinds of thing you can do around here without admin powers. (Anybody can watch articles every day of the year, for instance, it's the "watchlist" feature. Click "my watchlist" in the top righthand corner to check it out.) Not that admins are a secret clan, either: here's a list of them. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 13:01, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Stalking
Why, thought you could get away with adding nonsense? I'm not stalking you but nothing anyone does here is hidden. Adam Bishop 04:01, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I didn't look it up, I saw that you had created it (it appeared in the list of new articles). Adam Bishop 04:08, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Nope, they don't fall off the page that quickly, and you can see new creations as far back as a few days anyway...nice try though, I guess. Articles can be locked by administrators such as myself, but that's really a last resort. Why do you ask? Adam Bishop 04:18, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Miseshime
Thank you for playing jokes wih wikipedia. We do appreciate humor, but if you continue in this way, you will be kousoku from editing. mikka (t) 18:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * So how do I safely do humorous things on Wikipedia? In other words, how do I without breaking policies? --Shultz 21:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You better not. Humor is tolerated as long as it is directly related to the main task: creating an encyclopedia, but does not hamper it. Please read WP:NOT. You may want to try "sillypedias": Encyclopedia Dramatica or Uncyclopedia. Also on April 1st there is always a major joke to happen with main page of featured article, in the silliest possible way. mikka (t) 22:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Warning
Thank you for playing jokes wih wikipedia. We do appreciate humor, but if you continue in this way, you will be blocked from editing. mikka (t) 18:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * So how do I safely do humorous things on Wikipedia? In other words, how do I without breaking policies? --Shultz 21:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You better not. Humor is tolerated as long as it is directly related to the main task: creating an encyclopedia, but does not hamper it. Please read WP:NOT. You may want to try "sillypedias": Encyclopedia Dramatica or Uncyclopedia. Also on April 1st there is always a major joke to happen with main page of featured article, in the silliest possible way. mikka (t) 22:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Oct 2005
This message is regarding the page Vanna White. Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --Madchester 04:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.. Do not remove other users' comments from Talk pages... Also, Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors. Thanx. --Madchester 04:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Madchester 04:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. Do not remove other people's comments. Enjoy you block. --Madchester 04:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

This is my own page. MY OWN page. It's like dictating what I can or can't have in my own home. --Shultz 04:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, according to Wikipedia's Talk Page Guidelines, "As a rule, refrain from editing others' comments without their permission." Repeated offenders could be banned permanently. You've been warned. --Madchester 05:09, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Even if the others' comments are on MY talkpage? --Shultz 06:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, read the info on the given links. --Madchester 06:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I feel an air of SADISM when you say "enjoy you block". --Shultz 08:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Ad-hominem attacks are also frowned upon on Wikipedia. Don't push it. --Madchester 15:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Once again, please don't remove other users' comments without their permission. Thanks. --Madchester 05:11, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

How was the following vandalism?
I don't see how the following sentence "Addendums to articles also apply. For example: Adding to the McDonald's page that the first McDonald's in the former North Korea will open in Pyongyang in 2013 is also not appropriate." was vandalism.

WP:NOT (a crystal ball) was only addressing adding entire articles. It didn't address adding addendums to them. --Shultz 08:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il
Please stop making stupid and irrelevant comments on these articles' talk pages. Adam 02:50, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

The only ones who'd care about the comments I make about one of the most oppressive leaders on Earth would likely be those who actually swear loyalty to him. Don't. That's like swearing loyalty to Darth Vader, Emperor Palpatine, or otherwise anyone on the Dark Side of the Force. --Shultz 07:31, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

"I wish an entertainment company (WB, Disney, or whoever else) would make a character (likely a villain) named Kim Jong Eel that would be, of course, an eel, and prominently shown as the main villain on many cartoon shows." These are your idea of intelligent and useful comments, are they? This is an ancyclopaedia not a kindergarten. Adam 07:35, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

We can say what we'd like to about evil leaders. Those are ~22 million people in the Stalinist North that I share a commonality with, and that commonality is that I'm 1/2 Korean. Therefore, it's unsettling to know they're going through copious, undue hardship, all so the Dear Leader can keep his subjects under every personal whim, and keep enjoying a luxurious, selfish lifestyle. Those gulags are there so he can scare people from dissenting, in order to stay safely in power. (0143. My blunt side is getting to me.)

About the comment for him to be an eel and a villain on cartoons, well it doesn't hurt to make fun of one of the most oppressive and Stalinist leaders on the planet now, does it?

Tell me Adam, what is your stance towards Kim Jong-il? Do you actually respect the guy? --Shultz 07:50, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

PS: Look at this: Kim Jong "Eel"

Blocked
You are blocked for 24h for vandalism of McDonald's. You were told not to do such things. If you continue your jokes here, you will be blocked for good. mikka (t) 07:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Why didn't the guy give me a warning? Oh, wait! He's from the former Communist Bloc! What was he before the communist governments fell like dominoes? Was he an agent for one of their little KGBs? Whoever he was, his occupation(s) probably required people not to have the kindest of hearts. --Shultz 21:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Account blocked
You are blocked for a week for persistent trolling with your jokes in wikipedia. You are distracting other editors from work and hence disrupting wikipedia. You are on the way to be blocked permanently.

To other people who may be concerned: this user is perfectly aware what he is doing. He removed previous warnings from the talk page (restored). He is a deliberate troll and several people wasted quite a few time to sift thru his contributions. mikka (t) 20:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Besides the "removal" of previous warnings (which was not removed, but really relocated to a subpage), did it have something to do with the multitudes of spelling error redirects I made? What were some of the worst examples? Because I thought (and honestly thought) I was making a positive contribution by redirecting common and/or possible spelling errors. Many, many spelling error redirects have been made my thousands of Wikipedia users already, and admins are fine with those. After realizing this, I thought, "This is gonna be fun! I don't think I'm going to vandalize anymore!" I think I smell "bias", don't I? If not, how do I make spelling error redirects the correct way?
 * I am not yet convinced that you are not a troll, therefore I will not teach you how to troll in a more elaborated way, sorry. mikka (t) 21:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * What I am curious about is- what is wrong with making spelling error redirects? Wouldn't those help users who spell incorrectly? Moreover, many users have made many spelling-error redirects already, so I thought I was very much in the right. Look at "Chechnia" for example. It redirects to Chechnya. Someone was allowed to make it redirect to the article of the correct spelling. It hasn't been deleted, nor did an admin berate him about it. Why are others allowed to make such redirects, but I'm not? --Shultz 02:42, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Creating redirects from all possible spelling errors discourages people from learning correct spelling. Chechnia is not spelling error; it is a different widespread transliteration. A rule of thumb, search google. If you have, say, 10,000 hits with correct spelling and 5,000 hits with wrong spelling, then it is too late to teach people, and redirect may be created. buit if there are only 500 hits with wrong spelling, then the redirect is not desirable.
 * Also, you must understand the difference between a typo and wrong spelling. Redirects from typos are strongly nondesirable. Not to say that a typo may in fact be a totally different word. For a word "word" I may have 256 and more typos by accidentally hitting a neighboring key on the keyboard: qord, aord, sord, wire, wlrd, wprd, qlrd, qprd, qofd, etc.
 * Redirects from different spelling for personal names are absolutely undesirable. There are valid last names Shultz and Shults and Shooltz and Shoolts and you canot redirect them to each other.
 * Anyway, if you don't know something, you better not do it. mikka (t) 03:06, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * And FYI, I have Asperger's Syndrome. One of the common characteristic of those with Asperger's is that they might do what they don't know is wrong. In fact, their conscience tells them that it's 100% right only for the person to get frustrated later after being scolded that it's wrong. This has happened to me a lot. I know that some of my submissions in the past were outright vandalism (like adding that McDonald's will open in North Korea in 2009 or 2013, yes I knew that was wrong, but was having fun back then.) Then when I discovered that I could redirect spelling errors, I genuinely thought it was right. How could this have been more wrong? --Shultz 05:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I have no way to verify that you have this syndrome rather than a troll. Also, if you indeed have health problem, please keep in mind that certain occupations may be not for you. If you claim you lack critical thinking and cannot tell right from wrong, then you cannot be a lawyer and cannot write encyclopedias. mikka (t) 21:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * We can tell it's wrong when it's obvious. Many wrongs are, yet many other wrongs aren't so obvious. Have you read the article?
 * Those with Asperger's more often have to pick up social skills and parts of common sense by rote, whereas a more "normal" person can pick them up more seamlessly and naturally.
 * Think of it this way: It's like we have to hike up a mountain, and by the time we reach the top, "normal" people would've reached the top hours ago on a ski lift. See how hard it is for us?
 * It's even harder when we're not as accepted and get mistreated like how the KPA mistreats ordinary North Korean citizens.
 * I also want to spread the sum of human knowledge and help benefit the world in a bigger way. Many jobs, venues, et al, give accommodations to those with various disabilities. More so to those with Asperger's. Those with Asperger's often go into academic lines of work, even edit encyclopedias. I'm sure there's an accommodation for this. --Shultz 02:42, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The accomodation is very simple:
 * NO JOKES
 * NO FALSE CHANGES
 * Edit only articles where you have knowledge. At this moment you've lost confidence. Still, here is one more chance for you. KGB will be watching your changes. Be ready to provide exact reference where you've got information from, for verification. Otherwise you will be quickly reverted. You already wasted enough other people's time.
 * In a minute I am unblocking you. Good luck. mikka (t) 05:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It says I'm still blocked. Was there a glitch when you unblocked me? Care to fix it and/or try again?
 * You are not in the "List of blocked IP addresses and usernames". Probably a glitch. Try again. mikka (t) 08:55, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * But anyways, I'll keep in mind what you said, and will try to make redirects of only the more common spelling errors. When you told me about Uncyclopedia, I decided that there's where I'll make the bulk of my jokes from now on. My laughs-per-day increased significantly every day that I used that site.
 * Also, I guess I'll make my Runins subpage accessible from here. --Shultz 05:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

The Communism vandal
Please don't create redirects from articles to pages in the Wikipedia space (that is, pages whose names start with "Wikipedia:"). Wikipedia tries to avoid self-references because they confuse the process (how we make an encyclopedia) with the product (the encyclopedia itself). The Communism vandal isn't someone who would merit an encyclopedia article. We keep track of him as part of maintaining Wikipedia. FreplySpang (talk) 21:13, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Bad taste
Comparing me to Kim Jong-il was in bad taste. I have my own reasons for being atheist - you being religious does not give you the right to assume that I am twisted in any way solely based on my lack of religion. I hope this incident does not hinder any future correspondence. Yuyudevil 11:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
Blocked for 24 hours for pagemove trolling. I see you've been blocked for trolling before. → Fir e  Fox  19:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Firefox, listen, SchmuckyTheCat seems to hate me, ad-hominem. He's followed me from topic to topic either flaming me or deleting what I typed entirely, on the pretext of "This has nothing to do with the article", repeating that sentence over and over again. When he says "the speak command from the game Urban Dead might be more interesting to you", he implies that what I type is utterly BORING. I think he's just trying to make me miserable. Either get that commie to leave me alone or treat me with respect. (How old is the guy anyway?) --Shultz 19:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia talk pages are not a forum for general discussion. You keep trying to chatter on about things in talk pages, so I've removed them.  Talk pages also aren't a place for soapboxing about proposed laws and elections, so I also removed material similar to that.  I don't hate you, but I (along with several others) noticed your edits needed a lot of watching as they didn't meet Wikipedias policies on verifiability, NPOV, etc etc.  Your most recent edits do seem to be better, and I haven't "watched" your contributions for quite a while.  Several experienced editors have offered you guidance, and if you ever want to ask questions from me, feel free.  I'd gladly tell you the reason I make any edit that offends you. SchmuckyTheCat 07:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Copyright violation at Mitch Bainwol
In this edit you added the contents of an RIAA webpage to the article Mitch Bainwol. Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text. All websites are copyrighted unless they clearly indicate otherwise. This is a very important principle of Wikipedia because we could get into legal trouble for using copyrighted materials. For more details, see the Copyright FAQ. Also, I must say that your practice of moving warnings to the "Run-ins" subpage does not reflect well on you. It looks like you are trying to hide the evidence of your mistakes. FreplySpang (talk) 03:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, your deliberate copyright violation at Similac is very unwelcome. If you think there should be an article about a topic, and you can't be bothered to write it yourself, please list it at Requested articles instead of pulling stunts to try to get the attention of vandal-fighters. Moreover, the Similac business shows that you understand perfectly well what a copyright violation is. Copyright violation is a very serious problem for Wikipedia and people get blocked indefinitely for it. If you have committed other copyright violations, you should revert them yourself. This is a formal warning: If you continue to post material in violation of copyright you may be blocked. FreplySpang (talk) 04:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Other Admins said it was ok to relocate them on the Runins page as long as the link to it remains clearly visible (as seen on the pagetop). Ask Maru. --Shultz 04:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

"Oh gosh Freply, why do you have to follow me EVERYWHERE?"
Because you don't seem to understand copyrights and how much Wikipedia wants to get them right. In the case of the Russian Embassy picture - the materials on a website are copyrighted unless the website says they aren't. So, if the website doesn't mention copyrights, we have to assume that the images and text are copyrighted. This is right at the top of the Copyright FAQ, in the section labeled "Can I add something to Wikipedia that I got from somewhere else?" FreplySpang (talk) 16:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I deleted Image:Wonsan.jpg. The page that displays it on korea-dpr.com has a big copyright notice at the top and the bottom of the page. The copyright notice says "non-commercial use only." We can't use images with that restriction. If you want to contact the site owner and ask for permission, feel free. See Boilerplate request for permission for some examples of ways people do that. FreplySpang (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't meant to be "commercial", right? Otherwise, it would have ads, wouldn't it? If it's non-profit (by surviving on donations and what-not), then it's non-profit. --Shultz 20:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not commercial, but it is redistributed by commercial sites. We deliberately allow this. This is why we cannot accept "non-commercial use only" images. See the section in the Copyright FAQ headed "Non-commercial licenses." FreplySpang (talk) 22:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, redirects. You like to make redirects. You need to know about double redirects. Specifically, that they don't work. It's a bug in the software. When you create a redirect, you need to make sure that it goes straight to the full article. If one redirect goes to another redirect, it doesn't work right. FreplySpang (talk) 17:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * When someone clicks on what happens to be a double-redirect, they see what the redirect redirects to, so all they've gotta do is just click on it and they're there. Just one extra mouse click is all it takes. Also, I thought they're not that big a-deal because User:Russ Bot (or I thought that was his name) is, of course, a bot that fixes double redirects automatically. --Shultz 20:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's better to do it right the first time. People are working on bots to fix this, but it's too soon to depend on them. FreplySpang (talk) 22:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Please stop making up template names
Please stop adding made-up templates to articles. You've been violating Wikipedia practices on several levels with these efforts: You might want to review the many links provided in the Welcome message at the top of your talk page for ideas and places to get answers. But to answer your specific question, Template messages is the collection point for current general-use templates. You can also search for templates by clicking on the "Special pages" link (usually at the bottom of the "toolbox" in the left margin of any Wikipedia page), clicking on "All pages", selecting the "Template" namespace, and entering the starting characters of whatever template you're looking for. I hope you find this information useful. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 12:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * First and foremost, you should not attempt to stimulate response from the community by adding opinionated text (or template names) to articles. Editors will eventually start calling you disruptive and ask for a review of your edits. (Some might even erroneously call you a vandal.)
 * Second, you should ask questions about articles on article talk pages, questions of editors on their talk pages, and general questions about Wikipedia on the village pump. Posing a question like "Is there a LIST of all templates somewhere" in the edit summary of an article is a relative ineffective way of getting a calm and reasoned response from the editors who are trying to create and maintain excellent articles; they are more likely to ignore you or file a complaint.
 * Third, if you wish to experiment to find out what templates exist (or, for that matter, test out any edits), you should use Sandbox, not save the text in an article.
 * Fourth, whenever you edit an article, you should always click on the "Show preview" button to make sure your edit looks the way you intended it to — before you "Save page". This step also has the beneficial effect of display red links to pages (and templates) that don't yet exist, so you don't need to revert your own edits.

Your edits
Hello,

Earlier this month, you:
 * intentionally added copyvio content into an article (as your edit summary stated)
 * added your sister's birthday to January 19 (Note that I reverted my own edit less than 30 seconds later. I didn't intend for it to stay. --Shultz 00:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC))
 * created a "Bitch Mainwol" redirect to Mitch Bainwol... this is a personal attack against this person and vandalism of Wikipedia
 * created some other silly "word game" redirects like "Judenmouse" redirecting to Judenrat

Please don't do this sort of thing.

Also you created a large number of rather pointless redirects based on your impression of pronunciation. Something like creating "Toe Kee Oh" as a redirect to Tokyo (that's an invented example, but you created dozens of real redirects of this kind). We do occasionally have redirects based on typos; however, the redirects you created aren't useful because no one would ever actually type this. Please don't create those kind of redirects, they simply clutter Wikipedia. -- Curps 21:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia talk pages are for discussing article content. Sometimes humorous chat also takes place, but there is a fine line and you should not make pointless postings about random thoughts you may have had, for instance:. -- Curps 16:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

To answer your question, I remembered you were blocked a couple of times about a month ago and I came across your name again and I did check some of your contributions for the past month. I posted some observations above. -- Curps 16:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

General complaints
I hate to keep posting notes on your talk page, but your "shotgun" remark was not a good idea. I've temporarily blocked you for 24 hours. Take a deep breath and a timeout please. -- Curps 05:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

For the record if someone other than you or me is reading this, I'm not the admin in question (re: AfD and actual deletion of "Dechronification"). -- Curps 05:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Curps is right. I cannot mention the admin's name because I feel someone will contact him about this and cause him to torment me all over again. When he appeared to have left Wikipedia for the last time back in the beginning of this year (indicated by blanking his user & talk page & saying "good bye" in a Baltic language), I thought that really was the last of him. I felt relieved, until for SOME reason, he changed his mind, returned, and restored his pages. When he was gone, it felt safe to restore Dechronification. You know from experience how it feels safe to do certain things once certain people are gone, right?


 * And Curps, I'm about to head to bed. Central Time zone over here, so you can figure out what time it is. Perhaps you could have me unblocked by 3:00 tomorrow afternoon (Thursday February 9th), as that'll be after I have my last class that day. I know that after sleeping and concentrating on schoolwork, I ought to get calmed down. I've seen people get blocked for less than 24 hours before, so that's possible. --Shultz 05:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)