| Revision as of 17:13, 24 June 2005 editMarmot.org (talk | contribs)2 edits →Liberalisation of Faggotry← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:40, 25 June 2005 edit undoEveryking (talk | contribs)155,603 edits →Signing edits to discussion pagesNext edit → | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
| Alright, come on, I think I've been more than fair with you. You've been asked, multiple times to sign your edits to discussion pages with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) so that it shows your username and date. If you keep up your chicanery with IP's instead, it's still the same thing. You haven't earned much patience. - ] <sup><small>]</sup></small> 22:47, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC) | Alright, come on, I think I've been more than fair with you. You've been asked, multiple times to sign your edits to discussion pages with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) so that it shows your username and date. If you keep up your chicanery with IP's instead, it's still the same thing. You haven't earned much patience. - ] <sup><small>]</sup></small> 22:47, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ---- | |||
| Sorry for my belated response. I don't know much about the issue surrounding your block. Could you summarize whatever the matter, as neutrally as possible? ] 23:40, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:40, 25 June 2005
Hi MARMOT, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thanks for your contributions to the coolest online encyclopedia I know of =). I sure hope you stick around; we're always in need of more people to create new articles and improve the ones we already have. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines. First, write from a neutral point of view, second, be bold in editing pages, and third, use wikiquette. Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.
Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me at my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing ~~~~.
Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! --Spangineer (háblame) 15:17, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, I will do that.
Protection
I've unprotected this talk page. There's been ample precendent to say that one may edit one's user and talk pages as one sees fit. I'm quite certain there was a failed RFC on Netoholic at some point which concerned this behavior, but I can't find it at the moment (I will keep looking). If I do remember correctly, the predominant opinion was that while removing comments from one's talk page may be antisocial, it's within one's rights. I don't see what rule MARMOT has broken in removing comments from his talk page. If you desperately need to see old revisions, use the history button up top. Record diffs, if you want. But this is MARMOT's talk page, and he doesn't have to keep comments here that he doesn't want (at least as far as I'm aware). If MARMOT chooses to remove even this comment, I'd be content with his actions. - Vague | Rant 13:17, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
- Found it: Special:Undelete/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Netoholic_2. - Vague | Rant 13:33, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
- That is far from a consensus, and you were one of the only five people to agree that people can remove whatever they want from talk pages. That against at least five people that agreed it was not helpful. If you're going to cite some evidence that allows blanking a talk page in the middle of an RfArb against the user, you'll have to do better than that. - Taxman 13:51, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Resolution
We tried to be nice, but you have clearly not responded. I would rather you just relinquish this user account, and not edit from any anonymous IP's, but instead make productive contributions. Your views will be heard if you make them in anything but an offensive manner. If you make any more disruptive edits, you, and the IP's you claim, will be blocked from editing, probably indefinitely based on your history. Oh yeah, check this if you have any issues with that. - Taxman 17:38, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
- I'll try my best, k?
- You'll have to do better than that, but fair enough. - Taxman 00:27, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
Ok well sorry, but you haven't tried at all . It's really not that hard to be civil and help this place out and you haven't done that. So you're blocked indefinitely. - Taxman 17:09, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, and yes, as needed, I'll block the rest of the IP's you edit from too. - Taxman 17:24, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
Liberalisation of Faggotry
Did you really say that the anus photo promoted "liberalisation of faggotry"? LittleRedRidingHood 20:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- "Thanks for that, I'd sum it up as pointless."
Signing edits to discussion pages
Alright, come on, I think I've been more than fair with you. You've been asked, multiple times to sign your edits to discussion pages with four tildes (~~~~) so that it shows your username and date. If you keep up your chicanery with IP's instead, it's still the same thing. You haven't earned much patience. - Taxman 22:47, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
Sorry for my belated response. I don't know much about the issue surrounding your block. Could you summarize whatever the matter, as neutrally as possible? Everyking 23:40, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)