RealUpHuman
Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that one of your recent edits added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, likely in an attempt to display that image on the page. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ Talk 15:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
RealUpHuman, you are invited to the Teahouse!
edit
|
Hi RealUpHuman! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC) |
November 2016
edit
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Party and play. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:48, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Party and play have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Party and play, you may be blocked from editing. Smd75jr (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Party and play, you may be blocked from editing. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ Talk 00:06, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
November 2016
edit Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Answer to your messages at User talk:JamesBWatson/Open#Following The Rules : Neutrality
edit- Although I normally reply to talk page posts on the page where they are posted, so as to keep discussions together, on this occasion I think it may help to have my answer recorded in the history of your talk page, so I am posting my answer here. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:23, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- It is very difficult to understand all of what you are trying to say, because of the very confused and incoherent way it is written. However, as far as I can make out, there are at least the following considerations:
- You do not like the present content of the article Party and play, largely because you think that it places too much emphasis on the association with gay men. If so, then I suggest that you give a concise explanation of your reasons on the talk page of the article, and be willing to discuss the issues with other editors, with a view to trying to reach agreement. Please note the word "concise": what you have posted about it at present runs to about 2800 words, and it is unrealistic to expect volunteers to read all of that, especially as it is very difficult to read, because your writing lacks coherence. Remember also that editors on Wikipedia are volunteers, almost all of them acting in good faith. If you disagree with someone, the best thing to do is to explain why in a friendly and civil manner, in the hope that they will consider what you say, and perhaps come to agreement with you. Approaching other editors with a battleground approach, angrily denouncing what you see as their faults, is likely to antagonise them and encourage them not to take any notice of you. What is more, if you continue in that way, it is possible that you may come to be seen as a disruptive and unconstructive editor, in which case sooner or later an administrator may block you from editing, to prevent waste of other editors' time. Naturally, I hope that won't happen, so think carefully about how you approach other editors.
- The message that I left on this page earlier was about posting commentary in an article. If you disagree with the contents of an article, then by all means explain why on talk pages, but not in the article itself. You say that you accept my "explication", but you have continued to post your personal commentary into the article after receiving that message. You have even put commentary ALL IN CAPITALS, evidently in an attempt to call maximum attention to the opinions you are expressing.
- You link to outside sources which do not evidently have any connection to the issues you have tried to raise with the contents of the article.
- You have posted substantial amounts of text to Wikipedia which is copied from other places: for example, you have posted almost 1200 words from "Information Privacy In Cyberspace Transactions" by Jerry Kang. It is almost never acceptable to do that, as doing so infringes copyright. It is also pointless, as it is very unlikely that anyone will read all through it and try to work out how it applies to the point you are trying to make about the Wikipedia article: it would be far more effective to summarise in one or two brief sentences the points that are most relevant.
- You have repeatedly made attempts to use Wikipedia to publicise your web site, by various means, including repeatedly posting an image to your own user page and other editors' talk pages. Use of Wikipedia to publicise, advertise, or promote anything is not allowed: that includes promotion of opinions, web sites, email addresses, or anything else. That is another thing which, if it continues, may lead to being blocked from editing by an administrator.
It has taken me a significant amount of time to write, proof-read, and edit this message. I hope it helps you to understand some of the issues involved. Please take note of the points I have tried to convey, as they are points which you really do need to take note of if you are to continue editing Wikipedia. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:23, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- Since posting the above message, I have seen your sandbox, which clearly existed purely to publicise a book and a video. Once again, use of Wikipedia for promotion is not acceptable. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
February 2017
edit Hello, I'm Jim1138. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Talk:Party and play— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 04:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Party and play, you may be blocked from editing. Shearonink (talk) 05:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Talk:Party and play.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Shearonink (talk) 05:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Samtar talk · contribs 19:09, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
YOU MOTHER FUCKER ASSHOLE HATE SHIT FREAKS! --- I am not blocked -- My IP Restriction was till when March 1st --- why was this released today? YOU GUYS ARE SICK! SICK! SICK SICK! --- Don't let the door of your heart of souls hit you in the ass on your way out -- but I AM IN -- YOU ARE OUT! OUT OF LINE FOR FUCKED UP HUMAN SURE!
This QR Graphics SERVES HUMANITY WELL -- you really look at the debate: http://meme.gruwup.net/%23Makta.Pond/QR/QR-TheQuickening-AreYouAnInnieOrAnOutie.jpg
Where are APOLOGIES FOR YOUR RUDENESS ?? NOT MINE!
http://wordstoliveby.gruwup.net/ [ CONTENT REVIEW DIRECTORY ]
http://community.gruwup.net/Words-To-Live-By/
GET YOURSELF SOME MORAL GUIDANCE BEFORE YOU ATTEMPT YOUR FATE AT BEING LISTED @FUCKEDUPHUMAN.NET FOREVER -- GOD FORBIDS THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN!
YOU CENSOR DELETE ME -- THIS ACCOUNT COMPLETELY -- THE SUFFERANCE FOR THAT -- IS MY EDIT HISTORY ARE RESET -- YOU ARE SHAMEFUL
You just made your first edit; thank you, and welcome! 9:30am 2/26/2017 Then how do you explain this on site:
http://fuckeduphuman.net/%5bWebDomains%5d/wikipedia.org/
Someone who sees the whole history of this from outside there is a DATA ERROR -- account DATA LOSS occurred onto the account of RealUpHuman on Wikipedia in an UNJUST attempt to CENSORSHIP.
Art thou dejected?
Is thy mind o'ercast?
To chase thy gloom,
Go fix some weighty truth;
Chain down some passion; do some generous good;
Teach Ignorance to see, or Grief to smile;
Correct thy friend; befriend thy greatest foe;
Be just in all things; make amends
For follies past, and, with warm heart,
Forgive, and be forgiven. Let work not words
Thy virtue prove. Go act as well as prate,
And then thy counsels will be strong,
Thy reprimands avail. —ANON
THE province of the historian is to gather the threads of the past ere they elude forever his grasp and weave them into a harmonious web to which the art preservative may give immortality. Therefore he who would rescue from fast gathering oblivion the deeds of a community and send them on to futurity in an imperishable record should deliver a plain unvarnished tale. [1][2]
Good Day -- lets go in peace -- THIS NOTICE SHALL REMAIN UNTIL THE DATE OF MY ORIGINAL SO CALLED SUSPENSION OF MY IP BLOCKING -- March 1st -- OR ELSE!
Thank you for restoring my history -- I appreciate it!
Unblock request
edit
RealUpHuman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Reasons for Misidentifying me as a troublemaker --- is because the ones holding content of the Party and Play[3] article are the ones really in trouble of the truth and trouble of the "legal contentions" that I am indeed forcing into view -- yes this article as it stands is HOMOPHOBIC and it needs to be RELEASED to TO THE CITATIONS OF JUST LEGAL REASONS AND TO FREEDOM to be PROPERLY DEFINED BY THE WORLD ORDER OF TechnoRealism -- Can we open the dialogue without censorship please? -- can I go unimpeded by such intractable conflict nonsense? Thank you James Martin Driskill RealUpHuman (talk) 17:07, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I don't think we need your behavior here. Talk page access revoked.--jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 18:20, 26 February 2017 (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.
- To the reviewing administrator, please feel free to contact me off-wiki (email would be good) - though to be fair having a quick read through the above should answer any queries you have ("
YOU MOTHER FUCKER ASSHOLE HATE SHIT FREAKS
" being a delightful example) -- Samtar talk · contribs 17:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
RealUpHuman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Please remember I appear on this page in niceness --- they are they ones who are rudeness -- and they don't have to apologize? Just listen to the talk page as it was captured from begin to end --- UPSET YOU I SHOULD NOT BE? [4] RealUpHuman (talk) 17:20, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You have given no indication that you are aware of what you did wrong or how you will refrain from doing so in future. Amortias (T)(C) 20:42, 26 February 2017 (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.
February 2017
edit
RealUpHuman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #17623 was submitted on Feb 26, 2017 22:07:48. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 22:07, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
RealUpHuman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #25237 was submitted on May 17, 2019 11:10:05. This review is now closed.