User talk:DbelangeB
Sockpuppetry case[edit]
|
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/DbelangeB for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. nneonneo (talk) 23:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Unreferenced template[edit]
NB: The {{unreferenced}} template is only for use on articles that have no references or citations at all. Twice today you have used it on articles that had several references. Perhaps you intended something more like {{refimprove}}?--Srleffler (talk) 04:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Don't add sections under a 'Controversy' section unless you have references to back it up, otherwise anyone would just add whatever controversy they want to add to articles. Gary King (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- P.S. This is the only mention of the event at the Toronto Star: http://www.thestar.com/article/305862 . Gary King (talk) 16:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Chelophilately, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.
If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
Please do not create hoaxes, such as you did in the article Chelophilately. Cease and desist from introducing misinformation into Wikipedia if you are attempting to test our ability to detect and remove it. This has been done before, with universally negative results. Hoaxes are marked for deletion shortly after they are created. Kindly — do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method is to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia, and then to check to see how long they have been in place and, if possible, correct them. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia policy to learn more about this project and how you can make a positive impact. Thanks, Corvus cornixtalk 05:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
March 2008[edit]
Please do not make personal attacks as you did at Metrosexual. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Corvus cornixtalk 05:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry Corvus, but if you think that that picture was an attack picture, then how is the one for Brad Pitt not? Furthermore, by saying that putting a picture of somebody on the Metrosexual page is an attack, you are implying that Metrosexuals are somehow bad. That is very insensitive; I expect more of a Wikipedia editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.11.65 (talk) 14:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Attacks in the article Image:Metrosexuals.jpg[edit]
Please do not make personal attacks as you did at Image:Metrosexuals.jpg. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Corvus cornixtalk 05:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Greetings from a fellow Israeli! --Heinrich Himmler IV (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Copalindrome[edit]
Copalindrome makes no sense to me. If a string becomes a palindrome when it's reversed then it's already a palindrome, and that is trivial to check. Did you mean something else? PrimeHunter (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
WP:ANI notice[edit]
FYI, your edits are being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:DbelangeB. Please comment there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:04, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Wei Xi Fan[edit]
I have nominated Wei Xi Fan, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wei Xi Fan. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. nneonneo (talk) 02:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Personal attack against Nneonneo[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Nneonneo. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
If you've been accused of sockpuppetry, what you do is read Wikipedia:Sock puppetry/Notes for the suspect, not revolt against the accuser, as you did in the aforementioned user talk page. Really! 21655 τalk/ ʃign 19:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- While I remain unconvinced that I've broken any policies in spirit, perhaps I should explain that I've been acting with the frustration of one falsely accused and the disillusionment of one having the Wikipedian ideals abased and defaced before his eyes--aggressively by one user, and passively by the rest. A quick glance at my edit log shows that I have scarce made a contribution to Wikipedia in days, other than to defend some actions, deny others, and, in short, to feed a troll. Nneonneo is in need of professional help--most likely a nanny--and I haven't enough free time to provide it unpaid. If it is the will of the community, I'll allow him (I'm assuming him) to reach emotional maturity gradually, and on his own. DbelangeB (talk) 01:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Whatever your consideration, WP:NPA clearly states that you should comment on content and not the contributor. You continue to make aspersions regarding User:Nneonneo, and you are therefore blocked for 24 hours. Please moderate your language when the block expires. LessHeard vanU (talk) 17:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Would a foreman send one of his workers or colleagues to the corner for a "timeout session" for caring too deeply about his work? A chef? A general? What about a racist, self-inflated bureaucrat? I'd heard that Wikipedia was no place for diversity, either of pigmentation or of interpretation, but until now I, despite being a member of two oppressed minorities, have never felt that way. I said I was disillusioned; now, it seems, I am disenfranchised as well. I suggest that you get off my encyclopedia and continue your edits in a more appropriate medium. DbelangeB (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
—slakr\ talk / 22:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- As a side note, if you feel that you are being mistreated for being a member of a minority, we have several other administrators and normal editors from various minorities (e.g., Jews, gays, atheists, immigrants, asians, indians, and pretty much whatever other minority you can think of)— pretty much all of which would be willing to review your comments and likely disagree with your accusations of discrimination. It's easy to play the minority card, and I could easily do so myself to counter your accusations, but fortunately, calling people names, claiming to own the encyclopedia, and creating sockpuppets all seem to universally apply across all demographics as disharmonious to editing. --slakr\ talk / 22:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Racist? See Talk:Blair Peach and this from my talkpage archive. Can you say "Wrong!"? LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC) (Proud to have taken part in anti NF and anti Apartheid demonstrations in the 1980's and 90's.)
DbelangeB (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The block was put in place unjustly, by a known Trojan Administrator, ostensibly due to statements of "disillusionment" placed on my own talk page, and was--by the enforcer's own admission--racially motivated.
Decline reason:
That's not the stated block reason and despite your claims, I can find absolutely no evidence that the blocking admin admitted this block was racially motivated. — Yamla (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Also, what does "known Trojan Administator" mean? --Yamla (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- It is one who has sought and gained administrative access only to use it in disruptive ways. In this case, the term also refers to his favourite brand of chapeau. DbelangeB (talk) 00:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
DbelangeB (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Repeated blocking because of so-called sock-puppets (which are no longer extant, whose uniformly constructive contributions have all been reverted, and which, in any case, were not sock-puppets), having made comments that should not have been taken out of context, (apparently) embarrassing a mentally disabled person by outing him before the community, and practising a "politically incorrect" religion.
Decline reason:
This request shows no good-faith desire to improve Wikipedia or cease problematic behavior. Additionally, this talk page has been protected. If you wish to appeal your block, you may do so by contacting ArbCom directly. Good day. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- So in one fell swoop, you're saying Slakr is a "known" bogus admin and apparently an anti-semite, someone else is mentally ill, and that anybody who doesn't unblock you hates you because you're Jewish? To quote your own words, "I have seen this pattern of behaviour before in destructive users who are trying either to deflect guilt and reprisal from yourself onto other Wikipedians..." -- you might want to stop digging. =\ If these accusations are true, you really need some evidence to build a coherent case (diffs are great); if you're just saying these things out of anger, it's not going to help. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Page protected[edit]
Due to continued personal attacks, I have protected this page. Another admin will be along shortly to decline your unblock and then we can safely consider this matter closed. --Yamla (talk) 01:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)