User talk:143.231.249.141/Archive2
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:143.231.249.141. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
January 2006
January 3
This message is regarding the page Rick Kahn. Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 21:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
January 6
Someone posting from the account, while editing the article on Dana Priest, removed the adjectives "important" and "prestigious", on the grounds that they were POV.
"Important" described Ms Priest's articles. Ms Priest's November 2 2005 article broke the story of the CIA black sites. If that wasn't an important story, then what story is important? The repercussions from that story continue to echo two months later. It will be one of the most highly referenced stories of 2005. To challenge that it deserves to be described as important, is, IMO, itself POV.
The MacArthur Foundation grants are prestigious -- not as prestigious as the Nobel Prize, but, I suggest, in the very next rank. Removing the adjective prestigious, is, IMO, itself POV. -- Geo Swan 16:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
January 17
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! --Winter 19:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
January 25
Regarding the page Connie Mack IV, please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Hurricane111 17:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
January 27
This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing Wikipedia the next time you vandalize a page. If you wish to dispute the content of an article, please do so on the article talk page rather then blanking material without explaination. Consider also for a moment the example you are setting given where you are editing from. -Loren 05:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, that's it. You've been warned numerous times about vandalizing articles but your most recent edits clearly indicate that you have no intention of stopping. No one is above the law here and it doesn't matter whether you're some staffer on Capitol Hill or some bored kid sitting in a computer lab in an elementary school in Australia. You have been blocked from editing for 48 hours to allow you to think it over. You've made some good edits in the past and I'd encourage you to edit constructively in the future rather then vandalising. -Loren 21:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have unblocked this shared IP after being contacted an editor from this address, assuming good faith per policy. To whoever it was vandalising from this IP, please bear in mind that whatever you do reflects upon your orgranization and refrain from further vandalism. It's a sad day when we have to treat a House IP the same way we treat an AOL one. [1] -Loren 21:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
January 29
Due to vandalism, you have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. — FireFox • T • 15:02, 29 January 2006
How many times can a user be blocked?
Nice propaganda from the Politburo!
RFC to centralise discussion
In order to centralise discussion and to discuss your behaviour, I've filed a Requests for comment against you to discuss your behaviour so the community can better evaluate your worth as a contributor. It is available at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/United States Congress. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 08:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Newspaper report
- Lehmann, Evan. (January 27, 2006) "Rewriting history under the dome: Online 'encyclopedia' allows anyone to edit entries, and congressional staffers do just that to bosses' bios". Lowell (Mass.) Sun. - accessed January 20, 2006
February warnings
Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles[2]. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. — This user has left wikipedia 14:10 2006-02-01
Regarding the Mussgrave article: Please do not remove info unless you can back it up with a fact [3]
February warnings
Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles[4]. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. — This user has left wikipedia 14:10 2006-02-01
Please be aware that there are wiki users who are aware of the blatant POV editing that has been done by fellow US. Rep. staff members & we know that your IP address is registered to the US government for the House. We encourage NPOV edits and improvements to documents, but attempts to re-write documented events and historical data is looked down upon. When your blocking time is up, please be aware that your activity is being monitored. Thank you. --LifeStar 18:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Proxy Server
Given that this IP address was blocked for vandalism from a few Washington offices of Congressmen, I think I need to say that this IP address covers every House computer. I sometimes edit from my internship at Steve Rothman's office in Hackensack, New Jersey and have been blocked from editing there multiple times recently because this IP was blocked. Just something to consider when dealing with this IP address in the future. — Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 05:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
What's to prevent "Wikipedia Sanitation Services" from being a product for sale?
Any PR firm could include it in their list of services, I suppose; in which case the whole thing would be legal,I think, and this issue would be moot,perhaps. Neutralizer 19:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Nonagenarian
Please do not create a list of nonagenarians. It has been decided nearly a year ago that nonagenarian should only re-direct to ageing. Georgia guy 16:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Why is this IP still able to edit?
I was under the assumption that Jimbo had blocked these IPs. All the users of this IP seem to do is distort facts. I just had to revert a bunch of its blatently POV edits.--Jersey Devil 05:17, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Three Revert Rule
Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. — User:ACupOfCoffee @ 20:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for experimenting with the page Marsha Blackburn on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. — TheKMan talk 00:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
it was probably santorum
haha, someone in government is taking time out of there day to add a link to the advocate to prove octavia butler was a lesbian. finally our tax dollars are being put to good use.
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Elizabeth Dole. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. NatusRoma 03:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Do not remove comments from AfDs, especially those posted by others. Thank you. — TheKMan talk 21:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Don't alter the "unsigned" templates I've been placing on the WP:AFD/Spanjo page. There is no user named "Go Blue!" on Wikipedia. The page history always tells who placed the edits there, even if you change what's in the templates, so do us all a favor and stop changing the templates. --E lkman - (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
It might not have been your intent, but you recently removed content from Charlie Dent. 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. Thank you. — TheKMan talk 03:08, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Doctor Who. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. - File:Ottawa flag.png 
nathanrdotcom (T • C • W) 18:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
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. Thank you. RexNL 17:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Trey Parker. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Crumbsucker 22:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Categories
In order to add an article to a category, you have to go to that article, not the category page, and add at the bottom [[Category:A category you think is appropriate]], for instance if you wanted the father in American Dad to be in the category "Cleft chin", you would go to the article Stan Smith (American Dad) and add to the bottom [[Category:Cleft chin]], you would not put it on the American Dad page, because a show is not a person, real or fictional. But you should know, before you go around adding that category to pages, that it is up for deletion here. You can give your opinion on that page, but you should know that IP comments are generally disregarded unless they are particularly well formulated, so you might want to think about getting an account here. Welcome! Makemi 19:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Please read the above.Makemi 17:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
March 21, 2006
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Vicente Fox. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. — Wayward Talk 16:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Hugo Chávez. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. — Wayward Talk 16:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
April 2006
Your recent edit to The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept our apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 22:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --lightdarkness (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Your recent edit to William L. Jenkins was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept our apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 19:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for experimenting with the page Sire on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. AndyZ 19:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Heterochromia
Please add information according to the correct category. You left under "celebrities" in the hetechromia page a reference to Waynes World which belonged in the Fictional section. You also added information about Watership Down under celebrities when it's an animated film, and it has nothing to do with heterochromia since a cateract is not the same thing. --Speakslowly 04:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- I thought people in the House of Representatives were supposed to be smart.
New comment
a lot of these comments seem so mean-spirited. I am a wikipedia adder who has no intention of "vandalizing" things. However, I do edit incorrect grammar and spelling. I consider myself a wikipedia contributor that means no harm, so where is there room for us on this board? I thought wikipedia is meant for folk who can contribute helpful info. ((subst:unsigned|143.231.249.141}}
- Please note that you are not logged in, so you are sharing this page with many other users. Their behavior here may not have been as positive as yours. I suggest that you get a username, which is free, more private, and which will give you an individual identity. Cheers, -Will Beback 23:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Whitney Houston
Please refrain from blanking sections of Wikipedia without including a reason. It is considered a form of vandalism. Thanks! -- MrFixit1234 23:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Pi, 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. Ted 19:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Teddy Eismeier
Your recent edit to Teddy Eismeier was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 17:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Needham, Massachusetts
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 20:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Jay Thomas
Your recent edit to Jay Thomas was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 20:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed content from Kevin Young (poet). 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. Thank you. 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. CQJ 19:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Catholic Church (disambiguation). It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. JD[[talk|email] 19:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's NPOV policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Furthermore, reinserting the same commentary multiple times may cause you to violate the three-revert rule, which can lead to a block. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
NPOV violations
Please do not add commentary and your personal analysis of an article into Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Kuzaar-T-C- 17:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for experimenting with the page Narcissism on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you feel that the edit I reverted should not have been reverted, please contact me. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 18:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Narcissism. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. If you feel that the edit I reverted should not have been reverted, please contact me. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 18:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Justin D. Edwards
Your recent edit to Justin D. Edwards (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 20:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Gutknect
Please do not not directly copy information to Wikipedia, as you did here [5] from here[6]. Thank you, -Ravedave 19:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Blocked
You have been blocked for vandalism for 2 weeks. To contest this block, add the text
{{unblock}} on this page, along with an explanation of why you believe this block to be unjustified. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username (if you have one) and IP address in your email.Please do not erase warnings on this page. Doing so is also considered vandalism. Kungfu Adam (talk) 22:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Trent Franks
Thank you for experimenting with the page Trent Franks on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Rory096 16:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Jerrold Nadler. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. I would also like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! --Rory096 05:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed content from Tom Feeney. 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. Thank you. 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. Dina 15:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Tom Feeney. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 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. Dina 15:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Deleting content in Tom Feeney article
WARNING: Repeated reverts (you have done three so far today) can result in an automatic block. Please follow policy here: Wikipedia:Three-revert rule.
You might also note that, as described in Congressional staffer edits to Wikipedia, staff edits of a Congressperson can result in negative publicity. John Broughton 17:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Ray Nagin
Please note that the incident you added to the Ray Nagin article happened earlier this month, not back in January, in the section where you added it. -- Infrogmation 20:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Frederick H. Fleitz
Please avoid, perhaps accidently, removing content from articles, as you did to Frederick H. Fleitz. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Thanks, Iolakana•T 20:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like to repeat this. If by any chance you are (representing) Fleitz, you can use express your concerns with incorrect information on Talk:Frederick H. Fleitz . Han-Kwang 21:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, I overlooked that you already did express your concerns. Han-Kwang 21:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Cleft chin. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. 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. Dina 14:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and gives you many benefits, including:
- The use of a username of your choice, provided that it is appropriate.
- The use of your own personal watchlist to which you can add articles that interest you.
- The ability to start new pages.
- The ability to rename pages.
- The ability to edit semi-protected pages.
- The ability to upload images.
- The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website.
- The eligibility to eventually become an administrator.
- Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.
We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes (~~~~), which will let others know who left it. Neutralitytalk 22:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Category:Bronze Wolf awardees
Your recent edit to Category:Bronze Wolf awardees (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 19:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Please do not remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Tom Feeney. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 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. Nibuod 15:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Regarding edits made during November 9 2006 to Donald Rumsfeld
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits. Glen 17:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Your edits to Donald Rumsfeld
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, such as those you made to Donald Rumsfeld, 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. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 17:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism
As Congressional staffers and government workers, isn't there something more pressing to be doing than vandalizing Wikipedia? --AW 18:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Please do not remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Steve Buyer. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Prolog 17:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Natasha 18:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia because of 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, or deliberate misinformation; privacy violations; personal attacks; and repeated and blatant violations of WP:NPOV will not be tolerated. Mango juicetalk 19:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Congressional Paiges
Your recent edit to Congressional Paiges (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 12:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)