Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:02, 27 November 2007

4Chan

Template:TrollWarning

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks, such as the one here, damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. HalfShadow 22:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

What did I do HalfShadow? If what I did was a personal attack then so be it. I only said what i thought and i GET PUNISHED FOR IT ? I gave my opinion (that may have been wrong but i stick to it) and how is "moralising" not a personal attack. If Meowy likes the violation of innocents thats his own fault if he was offended. You can't punish me when I make some sense. And to that FAINT OF HEART comment I DONT CARE if thats what they think. NO ONE is going to tell me how to think. Just tah let you know. hahaha 12:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh and I am not trying to disrespect you because you are only doing your job. But don't tell me I'm doin personal attacks when the whole "Faint of Heart" and "Protest too much" is goin on there those are disses towards me. I don't take that kinda disrespect.

I believe you'll find that among the many editors here, I do not care about why or how you think the rules do or don't apply to you, because they do anyway. Effectively calling someone a child abuser simply because they don't see things your way is not on. If you continue, you will rapidly become a non-issue.

Ya know, I just dont care about what you have to say. You want to know why? I'll Tell Ya. I HAVE MY OPINIONS AND YOU CANNOT CHANGE THEM. Oh and next time SIGN your comments Just Tah Let U Know 12:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh and is it SO wrong to think the way I do?? Did I do something wrong by saying its wrong?? If I did I dont care anyways Just Tah Let U Know 12:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 12:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Tupac Shakur discography. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Misplaced Pages:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Spellcast 13:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Spellcast. Just Tah Let U Know 12:38, 26 October 2007

Child porn

If you are going to nominate this article please do oso otherwise I will have no choice but to remove the tag. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't even make sense. I AM BANNED from editing because I THINK THAT THE ARTICLE SHOWS PRO PEDO POINTS OF VIEW. I should not have returned to wikipedia. I left a year ago because of this sort of thing. I am not trying to insult u or any of the editors or admin but I think that this so called encyclopedia has become more and more under the control of a radical minority.Just Tah Let U Know 22:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Well er we need to have an article on child porn, it needs to be free of pro-pedophile activist POV and that klind of thing can be fixed with an {{NPOV}} tag or by editing to remove sadi POV as I did here.. The fact that you did not even give your nomination reasons or post the page on the deletion log but preferred to edit your user page wasn't a good sign and I was about to remove the tag myself but Phil got there first. So, no, you are not banned for displaying an attitude that the article is too pro-pedophilia. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

With all do respect, we do need an article on it, HOWEVER, there were times where I (anonymously) removed pro POV and times where I used my old one before i munged the password, and i would get banned by activist admins, insulted by pro POV editors, and threatend, tho I didnt take them seriously. So I thought that the only way to deal with it was to delete it. Oh and Phil blocked me.

I know that Phil blocked you. I would also state that he deleted the original which is why the oldest edit is 28th May, see here and he did so because of POV issues so I also think it fair to say that Phil is committed to not having an article infected by pro-pedophile activism propaganda, as I ma with all the pedophile articles. So, yeah, there are POV problems but the only way to fix them is to adhere to wikipedia policies. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh and squeak, I will adhere to the rules when dealing with radicals. I think you one of the few editors and admin here that actually know what they are doing.

Well I am an editor not an admin. Anyway do come back. Best wishes. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh i would like to know how to give reasons for NfD

This Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion is the page for nominating deletions but I would advise you nott o afd child pron as we need an article on this subject, but do try to edit to make it better. Articles like Adult-child sex and Pro-pedophile activism may be deserving of an afd (article for deletion) but child pronography isn't, it does though need watching to make sure it stays within our neutrality policy. Thanks, SqueakBox 23:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Angelocasio (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

$3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Block message:

$2

• Blocking administrator: $1 (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Yamla (talk) 22:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Angelocasio (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=One, I understand that what I did was wrong and two I will give good reason to delete the article.  |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=One, I understand that what I did was wrong and two I will give good reason to delete the article.  |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=One, I understand that what I did was wrong and two I will give good reason to delete the article.  |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

• Requests for unblock