User talk:Toyota6291

November 2014
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Citobun (talk) 03:55, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I am an instructor of HKUST. The act was for demonstration purpose in class. Will revert it later. I did this every semester to show the self monitor and regulation of Wikipedia. No harm is intended.

Block
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent vandalism. Deliberately posting false information into Wikipedia articles, over and over again, over a period of years, is totally unacceptable. Saying that you do it to "to show the self monitor and regulation of Wikipedia" does not make it acceptable, for at least five reasons. Firstly, in the period between your vandalism and an editor reverting it, users of the encyclopaedia may read the false information. Secondly, what you call the "self monitor and regulation" is a lot of people voluntarily giving up their time to clear up damage; it is contemptuous to treat volunteers in the way you do, gratuitously misusing their good will by deliberately posting rubbish with the explicit purpose of wasting their time with having to clear up your mess. Thirdly, any time spent clearing up your vandalism is time taken away from other tasks, so your vandalism has the effect of indirectly causing damage to other parts of the encyclopaedia. Fourthly, sometimes bits of vandalism are missed by editors while they revert other bits, resulting in parts of your crap remaining. Fifthly, you systematically set your students the example of treating Wikipedia as something that it is acceptable to vandalise if they wish to: scarcely a constructive approach to education. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. JBW (talk) 16:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) the period between the modification and revert is normally less than 24 hours. that is one of the main point i try to convey to students: the power of the community to ensure quality 2) I do not despise the volunteers.  In fact, i admire they ability to spend time to ensure quality of the web site.  see point (1).   3) I only make two changes, time to correct it is minuscule .  don't be too over dramatic.  4) if on one correct it in the next class, i will revert it. I also ask the students to revert it if no one has.   5) Whether it is a constructive approach i guess is a matter of debate.  They are instructors in US asking students to trample on Jesus photos.  To some people, it is not constructive approach. What i am doing is not intend to encourage vandalism.  By the way, I don't like your tone. you seem to assume you have a higher ethic than me.  I have been teaching more than 30 years.  I don't take crap from nobody. Toyota6291 (talk) 02:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)