It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Space Jam. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Wafulz 03:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.--Downwards 02:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to User:Paulley, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Cbrown1023 23:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to User:Paulley, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Majorly 23:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your edits in the FBI page were vandalism.. if you had read the edit summary you would have seen that reasons were given for the revert. the fact is the changes you made were bad for the article and to continue to make these changes is an act of vandalism --- Paulley
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. RobJ1981 00:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. Ravenswing 17:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Warning messages on this page have been subst'd using the AutoWikiBrowser . Note:This is not a new warning, but only some minor maintenance, following Wikipedias policy of subst'ing warning templates. Thank you.- TrevorMacInnis (Contribs) 19:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at St. Louis Blues (hockey), you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. Ravenswing 18:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Ravenswing, there's no need for personal attacks. Furthermore, RG is correct on the WP criteria for HHOF players. Gretz was with the Blues for only part of a season. GoodDay 22:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit adding Grant Fuhr as a hall of famer in LA KIngs was reverted because Fuhr doesn't meet the inclusion policy for hall of famers for the Kings, since he played just 14 games for the team. Please refer to the accepted inclusion policies at [1]Gmatsuda 00:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jabba the Hutt was indeed present in Star Wars IV: A New Hope, but only in the remastered 1997 version--he was not present (though he was named) in the 1977 original. Hope that helps. :) Justin Eiler 17:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to N.W.A., you will be blocked from editing. Sfacets 01:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, please ignore this warning
You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. ~ Arjun 02:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Y
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
Well you were given the last warning and you were *really* changing a lot of info on a certain article. It looked suspicious, but I know realize those edits were not vandalism. Sorry for any inconveniences. ~ Arjun 13:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Request handled by: ~ Arjun 13:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Usually, the most relevant quotes can be placed directly into the article text in order to illustrate the topic, and only a few quotes should ever be part of such a section. Longer lists of quotes are generally moved to Wikiquote and the Quotations section as a whole is replaced with a wikiquote badge, usually placed at the top of the "External links" section.
However, Can't sleep, clown will eat me did not actually move the quotes to Wikiquote before deleting them. I've moved the quotes to Wikiquote and added the link to them under a "Quotes" section. If you think the link should be somewhere else, go ahead and move it. However, if you disagree with the Manual of Style's guideline, we should bring this up to the Guide to layout's discussion page. Wangry 22:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The list of diss songs has already been deleted in a valid AfD without any stipulation to merge. The list on Diss song is a repost of deleted material and should remain deleted. If you have a problem, take it to WP:DRV. Thank you. JuJube 19:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hi, i just wanted to point out that although i feel placing the Murder Was the Case soundtrack box on the Ice Cube page is completely fucking ridiculous and makes no sense what so ever, i decided to compromise. basically all i did was augment a section that explicitly states Cube only has one song on the entire soundtrack (although you had it set up so it looked like he was on the entire soundtrack). as far as the "no one else agrees with you Alex" thing goes, no one disagrees with me either, and i'm not going to give u a lesson on wikipolicy because you clearly havent learned anything from any of the warnings you've been given on this page. i wasnt removing your edits to "argue" you with you, if you were right i would be fine with that, but your methods have no rationality to them. no need to respond, i think things are pretty much settled, you have your pointless fucking box on the page and i have the relevant and important details down. sound like a civil compromise? only on wiki. --AlexOvShaolin 06:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at The Diplomats edit history on 6 May [2] and 8 May [3], you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Cloudz679 18:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I noticed you added album covers on that page again without explaining. Those images are a copyright violation (see WP:MUSTARD), and shouldn't be included. Yes, I know heaps of other pages have covers, but that's slowly fixed up. Spellcast 17:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter how long it's been up for, if it's a copyvio, then it's a copyvio. There's not enough information on the discography page to justify fair use in using the covers. If I didn't revert it, somebody else would have and there's no use doing what got you blocked in the first place. Thanks and happy editing. Spellcast 06:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your commentary on Reggie Jackson is inaccurate. The Hall of Fame has always maintained the choice on players' caps but they never decided to begin enforcing it until the Wade Boggs controversy. Since then, the Hall has been open about making the decisions instead of the players. In Reggie's case, he has stated publicly that he was planning to go in with an A's cap but was upset at the Oakland management after they fired him as a coach following the 1991 season. He then received a senior management job from George Steinbrenner, who made a concerted effort to re-connect Reggie to the Yankee franchise in the hopes of getting the HOF cap. In reality, Reggie played 11 years with the A's and won 3 World Championships in Oakland versus 5 years in New York with 2 World Championships. Moreover, the 1972-74 A's were the last team before the 1998-2000 Yankees to win 3 straight, and Reggie was the team's best player and centerpiece. I truly believe that had the Hall of Fame been aggressively making the decision in 1992 at Reggie's induction, they would have chosen an A's cap for him. The best point of reference here would be Gary Carter. Carter played 11 years for Montreal and played 5 years for the New York Mets. Carter won the 1986 World Series on a very memorable Mets team and to this day, many more people probably remember Carter as a Met over the Expos. However, even despite Carter's open desire to wear a Mets cap, the Hall overruled him and put an Expos cap on his plaque due to the more years of service and greater aggregate statistics achieved in Montreal. It would have been the exact same situation with Reggie, except that his years in Oakland were much more memorable than Carter's years in Montreal, considering the 3 straight titles won on dominant A's teams in the early 70's.Pascack 22:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Due to your continued edit warring and repeated personal attacks on other editors you have been blocked for 1 week. This is your third block and not the first time you have been asked to stop harrasing and attacking others. Please stop and change your behavior. You are welcome to return after your block expires but please contribute productively if you chose to do so. Continued disruptive behavior may result in exhausting the community's patience. Please be civil and abstain from edit warring. Regards, Signaturebrendel 04:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see Googie Man had reported me again, but let me assure you, it not vandalism, Jose Canseco had signed contracts with both teams that I had added and played a few spring training games. Yes, I realize that he didnt play any regular season games but being that he did sign contracts with the teams and did play with them in spring training, technically Canseco was a member of the teams that I added, so I don't think its vandalism. Oh and I'm sick of Googie man treating me as if I'm some type of Ruthless Vandal and calling me "Rogue" and "abuser". I think he has a grudge due to the fact that I replaced his free use picture of Don Mattigly with a fair use picture of Don Mattingly. I can't tell the difference between Fair and free use. I just don't know the rules of Wikipedia.
Do you have any sources to support the content you are attempting to add to the articles in question? As for pictures, free images (images where the author has released all rights into the public domain) are always prefereable over fair use images (images w/ a copyright on them). If you "don't know the rules of Wikipedia," please don't engage experienced editors in edit wars, but attempt to learn from them first. As for the current issue, again, please tell me whether or not you have reputable sources for the content you wish to include in the respective articles. Regards, Signaturebrendel 18:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Due to your remaks on Googie Man's talk page, refusal to discuss changes to an article in a civil manner and continous, if slow, edit warring I have issued a 72h block. Before you exhaust the community's patience, please adopt a more constructive editing behavior. Be civil towards your fellow editors, disucss changes to article in a civil manner on the correpsonding talk pages and provide references for information you are trying to add to an article. Regards, Signaturebrendel 22:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.
