User talk:Tedpatten

Welcome!

Hello, Tedpatten, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 17:16, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Whitefish Mountain Resort[edit]

I don't know what you mean by this edit but you need to take it down a notch. "Leave me out of this nonsense and do not ever name me as a perp or you'll be visiting Cummings, et al." - if that is meant to be a threat you will find yourself blocked pretty quickly, and if it is intended as a legal threat then per WP:NLT you will be blocked immediately.

Wikipedia has a strict policy regarding potentially libellous material at WP:BLP, if you have an issue raise it politely there or on the article talk page. You were not polite, nor courteous, with your aforementioned edit and we don't want to see that happening again. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 15:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Clapp, as a single purpose account, seems to be placing blame for his corporate woes on me. If wiki is so interested in being "polite", & NPOV, why has this absurd accusation been on the discussion page since November 2008?Tedpatten (talk) 14:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it retained in the discussion? Because it is a discussion. That is all. You need to focus more on what Wikipedia is. It is a collection of information gathered from various resources. The validity of the information and resources is discussed on the discussion pages. The discussion you are clearly overreacting to is one about a news article that, according to the discussion, was of questionable validity and then removed from the article. It should remain in the discussion archives in case someone attempts to put it back in the article. Instead of a repeated discussion, all that will be necessary is to point editors to the old discussion and remove it from the article again. -- kainaw ™ 15:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SunTrust Banks[edit]

Please note that you've now had five separate people, including myself, say the obviously WP:COATRACK content you added is inappropriate. Please observe WP:BRD and do not continue to edit war to restore it, or I will request that your account be blocked. Wikipedia is not a battleground to take up your favorite causes and I suggest you stop treating it as such. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 01:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. - 2/0 (cont.) 09:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, Thanks[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Don't bother. I'm not going to argue with professional "editors" hiding behind fake names. Tedpatten (talk) 16:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No reason for unblock given. BTW I am using a pseudonym, but do not get paid. I probably would hate to work here if I did get paid. Peridon (talk) 19:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.