Beantwo

This user may have left Wikipedia. Beantwo has not edited Wikipedia since 2011. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Brave face.jpg)

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:Brave face.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:70.116.66.29, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 02:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Signing

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your signature doesn't seem to be working here User talk:76.118.47.247, cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 08:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

March 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You have been blocked from editing for 12 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Israel Defense Forces. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Nja²⁴⁷ 06:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Comment on block

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Unless I missed something, Beantwo did not violate 3RR, and a warning would have been, at most, the proper thing to do. He was not reverting vandalism, however, he was reverting an IP insertion of a section dispute tag. Beantwo may have been naive, and did not realize that a reviewing admin may not have the time to do his own research; while this is regrettable (my opinion is that no admin should deny an unblock request if the admin isn't willing to verify, for starters, the conditions that led to the block, or at least to check the assertions of the unblock request. Denial of a request isn't an emergency and if an admin doesn't have time, then the admin should leave it to someone else.

Having said this, Beantwo, it's very easy to get blocked when you think you are following guidelines for articles, but you break the guideline about 3RR. You can be blocked without warning, sometimes, though I think you should have been warned here instead of blocked, particularly because you didn't break 3RR, but stopped at it, but appealing a short block can be more trouble than it's worth; the efficient thing to do would have been to present diff evidence that your actions were proper. Except I've looked at them and I have my doubts about their propriety. The IP editor you were reverting attempted to discuss the matter in Talk, you did not. Therefore I conclude that you were edit warring, and while you got somewhat of a harsh sanction for it, unless you stop and think. Just how terrible is it to be blocked for 12 hours? It's almost not even a slap on the wrist.

It's an easy mistake to make, but starting to rave about it, and about an admin making a decision, even if the decision is wrong -- and it may not have been wrong -- can make it worse. Let it go. I mean really, abandon any idea that what was done to you was "wrong," though you can still think there was a mistake. I've been blocked. It sucks. But, in the end, maybe it's good to get some perspective. My block was indef, if I'd started raving, I'd still be blocked, I'm sure. I still challenged aspects of the block, but in a maximally non-disruptive way, and received, effectively, apologies, and then dropped the rest. You don't have to lie down and play dead, but be civil, respect the good faith of admins, including those who might have blocked you, and move on. Good luck. --Abd (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Great post Abd! Thanks! If only admins had this way of thinking. Apparenlty I didn't look at that specific talk page because the existing reverts to that same user by registered users moments before. That's something I could see needing be done regardless. Just not a lot of vandals discuss it so I got in that pattern. Noobs :D Beantwo (talk) 00:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Actually, many admins are quite aligned with what I write, Beantwo, they do think this way. Never assume that an IP editor is a vandal, and don't get into an edit war with an IP editor. You can't win, not by yourself. Make a revert, maybe two with obvious vandalism, but ... then get help, such as RfPP, if you run into IP edit warring. Try to engage the editor on Talk; when you make any repetitive revert, use "see Talk" in your edit summary and open discussion of the edit or your revert on the Talk page, explaining your action. You'd have seen the IP editor's talk comment. The edit you were reverting was harmless, not clear vandalism. If it had been obvious vandalism, you'd have had no trouble, usually. See my extended comment on AN/I. And good luck. --Abd (talk) 01:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hello, Beantwo! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 02:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Welcome to the project. --Kumioko (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)Reply