Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:06, 21 August 2006

It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of Grazon. Please refer to contributions for evidence. See block log.

could you please use the edit summaries box? that way we will know what you are changing

Your edits to American liberalism

The claim that Coulter is racist is a point of view, not a verifiable fact. Even if it were a verifiable fact, it is not relevant in the context in question. That is why your edits keep getting reverted. dbtfz 03:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with dbtfz. While there is no doubt she used the term "raghead" that does not prove she's a racist. I don't like Coulter any more than you do, but putting irrelevant insults into the American liberalism article isn't helping Misplaced Pages nor making a good argument against her. Better to let people make up their own minds about Coulter rather than enforce your view of her. Good luck, Gwernol 03:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: your reply on my talk page

"because isolated statements shouldn't define someone" - we agree :-) BTW, I'm not trying to suppress your views, just looking after Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy. I really do agree with you about Coulter. I also took a look at some of your recent edits, and you're doing great work. Keep it up. Best, Gwernol 03:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

March 26 2006

Thanks for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. 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. --LBMixPro 04:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Van Gogh (disambiguation). It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. - Tangotango 04:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The page you edited is a disambiguation page, which is intended to guide users to the correct article. There is no need to republish facts on the disambiguation page - only the name and a short description (e.g. Russian painter, English cartographer) are required. Please edit the relevant biography page if you want to. Thanks. - Tangotango 04:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. -- King of Hearts 04:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

John Hinkley

Please be aware of and adhere to Misplaced Pages:Three revert rule. Since a number of editors object to the bin Laden link, I suggest you use the talk page to explain your reasons for including this link. Gamaliel 05:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Harriet Tubman

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Harriet Tubman, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 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. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for taking so long to respond--I usually try to be as prompt as possible, but I got distracted and didn't receive your message until just now. In looking over this case again, I still believe the edit should have been reverted; however, I have removed my warning because I do not believe your intention was to vandalize this article. In your comment on my talk page, you remarked, "...I know Harriet Tubman's brain damage was the result of her standing in the way of a white man who was trying to catch a runaway slave. I also remember she played up her brain damage when it was to her advantage." If you'll look more closely at the edit that WillC and I reverted, you'll see that neither of us took issue with the actual point you sought to include, but rather with the way in which you phrased it. In reverting WillC's removal of your edit, you replaced the correctly spelled "capturing" with the incorrectly spelled "captureing," and you added a phrase about her "brain damage," that I, at first, thought was a derogatory and innapropriate remark (though I now see that you did not mean it as an insult to Ms. Tubman). I also saw that you were editing from an anonymous IP account, which further influenced my opinion that the edit was vandalism. You did leave the edit summary "rv"; however, your revert merely replaced, in my opinion, gramatically and styllistically correct text with incorrect text. For these reasons, I eroneously marked the edit as vandalism, for which I do apologize.

You might want to speak to WillC or post a remark on the article's talk page asking for advice on how to incorporate the ways she used her disability to her advantage into the article, as it doesn't seem to fit where you placed it. You might notice that your previous edit regarding how she obtained her handicap was left untouched, as it does seem to flow with the rest of the article. I'd really like to encourage you to register for an account, as edits from anonymous users are far more likely to be reverted as vandalism, and please always use descriptive edit summaries--they are very useful in alerting other edits of what changes you make and your reasons for making them. Again, I'm sorry for accusing you of vandalism, and I hope this won't discourage you from contributing to Misplaced Pages. Thank you for alerting me of my mistake. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from removing content from Misplaced Pages, as you did to Frank James. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Fang Aili 22:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Username

If you are going to edit here regularly you ought to get a username. -Will Beback 01:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

He has an account. It's User:Grazon. He has an RFC too: Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Grazon. Most of his contribs are attempts to smear Republicans, usually by adding out-of-context quotes or external links. Rhobite 04:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh. I hope Grazon knows he can sign his name by hand when he's not signed in. It is confusing to deal with multiple identities. -Will Beback 05:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

That shouldn't be a problem, he rarely uses talk pages and rarely leaves legitimate edit summaries. Rhobite 05:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

For the record, this talk page belongs to the IP, not to any specific user. If a user wants a page of their own they need to log in. Please do not delete material from here. -Will Beback 20:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't know why you don't log in anymore, but either way you must still be a responsible Misplaced Pages editor if you're going to edit here. Please use edit summaries, explain all additions and deletions, make only NPOV edits, and all of the WP:5P stuff. Cheers, -Will Beback 08:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

newsmax links

Hey; why the removal of the newsmax links? ~ PseudoSudo 00:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

> Newsmax lost it's credibility after this.

> http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/goldstar.asp 132.241.246.111 01:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, that story is five years old. You're mass-removing links at a rate of which you can't possibly verify their individual credibility; I definitely saw relevant ones in that batch. If you honestly think there is something fundamentally flawed with Misplaced Pages linking to newsmax articles, bring it up on a talk page. As well, make use of edit summaries, please, when removing anything non-trivial from an article; else people are going to categorize you as a nameless vandal and have no mercy in reverting edits. Thanks. ~ PseudoSudo 01:24, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

> Well

> for the record I have no intention of removing everything linking to newsmax. and I'll take some of your advice. 132.241.246.111 01:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Not everything? You've removed a few dozen in fifteen minutes. What's your criteria for removal of a link? ~ PseudoSudo 01:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

How about this unexplained removal of a working external link? Yes, it looks like vandalism. The least you could do is write an informative edit summary. -- Hoary 03:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Now you're writing edit summaries that hint at what you're doing. Good, that's a first step.

If you want to remove one or more links from a article, you should be able to muster the energy to explain this cogently (yes, in complete sentences) on the relevant talk page. Not just "=BS".

I'm open to persuasion, really. I haven't read the article whose link you're so keen to remove, but I have glanced at it, and the degree (and nature) of the advertising that surrounds it is tacky. -- Hoary 08:37, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Human Events links

After having been warned about your conduct with regard to Newsmax links, you're now doing the same with Human Events links. The link on the Tom DeLay article was to a piece by an experienced criminal lawyer who analyzed the indictment in terms of specific provisions of Texas law. Whether you agree with his conclusions or not, and especially whether you like DeLay or not (I myself despise him), that's a legitimate ext link. On Barack Obama, your edit consisted of changing one digit in the URL so that it no longer linked properly to the targeted Human Events article. That edit was clearly vandalism. The right-wing POV warriors on Misplaced Pages are a significant problem, but the solution is not to become a left-wing POV warrior. JamesMLane t c 10:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy editing. Steve block talk 13:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

April 18, 2006

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Politepunk 08:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

?

132.241.246.111 08:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC) {{unblock|The name of the celebration really does translate as Penis Day.

This account has been blocked due to repeated vandalism. You are welcome to edit after the block expires if you follow Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. -Will Beback 06:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted a recent edit you made to the article Morton Smith. You did not provide an edit summary, and I could not determine whether the edit was vandalism or a constructive contribution. In the future, please use edit summaries. 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. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Fighting Dems

Please get people to agree with you by using solid evidence on tald pages before you "demerge". Thanks.--MrFish 17:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

When editing an article on Misplaced Pages there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

-Will Beback 04:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Once you get into the habit, it isn't hard. The only time I omit an edit summary is when I press the "enter" key by mistake. Cheers, -Will Beback 04:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/F-J. 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. Chodorkovskiy 05:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure if your edit was well intended, but assuming good faith, I advise you to discuss such changes on talk pages before making them. --Chodorkovskiy 05:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, well in that case - until next time.--Chodorkovskiy 05:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/F-J, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 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. Tufflaw 05:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

RE:VandalProof

Yes. That doesn't make you blocked (only administrators can do that), but it does mean your edits will be monitored more closely than others, so please leave edit summaries and discuss changes such as reporter>hooker on talk pages. If not, they are next to guaranteed to be reverted shortly. --Chodorkovskiy 06:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yup, you still are. I'm afraid it's quite permanent.--Chodorkovskiy 15:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Vicente Fox, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 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. cholmes75 02:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

RE:Proof BTK was a Republican

Thank you. Now if you provided similar proof of Ángel Maturino Reséndiz's involvement with the Republican party, it would just be perfect.

P.S. I was talking about the article's talk page, not mine. --Chodorkovskiy 05:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

ANSWER Coalition edits

That link should not be added for several reasons: (1) It's in the wrong place. Nothing to do with immmigrant rights. (2) It's not relevant to anything. So someone associated with ANSWER is an asshole? Who cares? (3) Read the comments to the linked post. Turns out the person/people responsible weren't actually even associated with ANSWER. Kalkin 04:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page John Doolittle on Misplaced Pages. 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. 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. Mhking 05:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

this is a west coast matter

Actually, this is a wikipedia matter. Random non-notable blogs should not be linked to. I think it's fairly obvious what your goal here is. Stop it. You'll end up banned again. ---J.S (t|c) 06:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

FYI

1) John Doolittle is non-notable 2) I think it's fairly obvious what Mhking's goal here is 3) don't threaten me.

132.241.246.111 06:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

1. John Doolittle is the definition of notable for the purposes of wikipedia. Have you read the pages regarding notability?

2. I can't threaten you with a ban. I'm not an "admin." I was warning you. If you don't change your actions you'll get banned again.

Misplaced Pages is not the place to push your agenda. In any case, you should be fairly happy with the Doolittle page, it's 90% about all the controversy and critisims. ---J.S (t|c) 06:27, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Please stop adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Ted 03:01, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Arg...

Those two categories are in two different category trees. They are not redundant to each other as far as I know. ---J.S (t|c) 06:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Jeff Gannon

Yes, yes, I'm sure there's plenty of dirt to dig up on the guy. However, labeling him as a "plant" and a "prostitute" instead of a "columnits" poisons the well beyond salvation. Please maintain NPOV. If you wish, add the word "controversial." --Chodorkovskiy 18:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what you're trying to prove by inserting the most inflammatory possible description of Jeff Gannon on the GLB people list, but Misplaced Pages requires that we maintain an NPOV approach. It's not that we disbelieve you; we know about the whole Gannon thing. It's a matter of what's the most appropriate manner to present the information — the list description has to be as short and simple as possible. His article can go into the added detail about why he's so controversial, but it is not appropriate to provide excessive detail on the GLB list. Bearcat 03:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Michael Skakel on Misplaced Pages. 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. 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. Mhking 01:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Blanking on 2006 May 7

Please refrain from removing content from Misplaced Pages, as you did to Trilateral Commission. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —Mets501 03:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted a recent edit you made to the article Bill Clinton. You did not provide an edit summary, and I could not determine whether the edit was vandalism or a constructive contribution. In the future, please use edit summaries. 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. Zpb52 02:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Newsmax

Grazon: It is not appropriate for you to remove all Newsmax links you find. Please stop. You're removing valid references from articles with no consideration for WP:V. If you find a better reference for a fact, please replace the Newsmax link. If you doubt the accuracy of a fact, bring it up on the talk page. Rhobite 03:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It seems that all you care about is removing any Newsmax link you find, regardless of the context. If you cared about the quality of Misplaced Pages articles, you wouldn't have removed the Newsmax reference from Dick Morris, where it is clearly used in a relevant and factual way. Rhobite 03:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. OhNoitsJamie 03:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. OhNoitsJamie 03:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to User talk:132.241.246.111, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 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. Zpb52 04:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Eric Robert Rudolph, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 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. Zpb52 04:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Misplaced Pages. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and repeated and blatant violation of WP:NPOV are considered vandalism. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. --rogerd 04:28, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

overkill

{unblock|I didn't vandalize the page I reverted it to the way it was before Rush fan showed up+added a link} 132.241.246.111 04:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations. Yes, by deleting all the warnings (which you shouldn't have done) you've got my attention. Now, what are you talking about? Please provide a link to the diff where you revert some page before "Rush fan" (a Limpbore lover?) did whatever to it. Thank you. -- Hoary 06:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

This is the article in question Eric Robert Rudolph.

BTW sorry.

132.241.246.111 06:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Here (a series of three edits) you add the sentence "After the Olympic bombing, Eric visited his gay brother Jamie in New York, quoting Rush Limbaugh over dinner." You provide no edit summary.

Here you reinsert it, with the edit summary "this isn't vandalism this is what they talked about".

I'm only dimly familiar with this particular US rightist nutball. It seems that at least some other editors are certain that this event either didn't happen or is unimportant. Its importance aside (for a moment), where's your evidence for it?

I do notice that in this unsigned edit, 70.68.45.50 writes that this addition is "unnecessary" (without saying that it's untrue) and also is "an attempt to defame" the person he chummily refers to as "Rush". This is indeed unimpressive argumentation. Well, let's see something better. Really, I'm looking forward to reading it here, and I'd be even more interested if you could explain the importance of this factoid once you've demonstrated its verifiability. -- Hoary 06:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for being nice Hoary but I think this will have to wait till tomarrow. 132.241.246.111 07:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

That's quite OK. (Actually it's better that you take your time and come up with something good rather than rushing to provide some support, however feeble.) I look forward to reading the explanation tomorrow then. In the meantime, stay cool. -- Hoary 07:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. 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 ], 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 hard work of others. Thanks. ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 16:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked

I have removed the block, after evaluating some of the edits you made. Happy editing, and apologies. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 19:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

P.R. trip to Iraq

I removed the section on his P.R. trip to Iraq. Some random coincidence just didn't seem to be important enough for the article. ---J.S (t|c) 19:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

User:J.Smith and I have had differences of opinion, and I'm no fan of Doolittle, but on this I agree - the coincidence isn't worth posting to wikipedia. Just not important. John Broughton 00:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Kilcher

Indeed :) Mad Jack O'Lantern 19:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Trent Lott. 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. ILovePlankton 20:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to "Crazy" Joe Davola

Your recent edit to "Crazy" Joe Davola was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Misplaced Pages 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. // Tawkerbot2 19:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Osama bin Laden on Misplaced Pages. 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. Thank you for your understanding. 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. Marysunshine 15:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to List of virgins

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --rogerd 01:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Danielle (2006 film)

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Supadawg - ] 23:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

In response to the comment you left on my talk page, you cannot add biased material, and I will continue to revert any edits you make that display it. You do not own "your work", as you subjected it to the GFDL by submitting it. Supadawg - ] 23:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Brian Flemming. 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. ShaunES 23:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thomas Logan

Please do not add your own interpretations to the Thomas Logan article, Thank you. T-1000 01:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Furthermore, reinserting the same commentary multiple times may cause you to violate the three-revert rule, which can lead to a block. OhNoitsJamie 21:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Al Gore

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; 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. Gamaliel 23:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

no personal attacks

Regarding this edit summary: Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; 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. CovenantD 02:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Islam in the United Kingdom

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Islam in the United Kingdom, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 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. —Mets501 (talk) 21:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit was vandalism because it was an attack against Islam, and did not conform to the Neutral Point of View (see WP:NPOV) —Mets501 (talk) 21:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You could have not used the section title "Hate" and posted it in the external links section, and you could not have posted a link to such an anti-Muslim site. (Even if it was added correctly, I don't think it would stay, but it would not be considered vandalism). —Mets501 (talk) 21:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I meant anti-Muslim page. Listen, go ask a Misplaced Pages administrator if they would keep the link and if they say yes then I will add it back and remove the warning. —Mets501 (talk) 21:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, let's just let this go. —Mets501 (talk) 21:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

highly questionable edits today

You've made numerous highly questionable edits today to multiple articles, many reverted three times already by different people (Criticism of Islam, List of celebrities with links to the U.S. Republican Party, Born in the U.S.A. (song)). Please slow down, take a deep breath, and consider engaging on the talk pages of those articles if you really think these edits are legitimate. Merzbow 00:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during June 21 2006 (UTC) to Born in the U.S.A. (song)

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. 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. Bachrach44 19:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Angela Devi. 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. Viridae 01:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Columbine conspiracy theories. 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. Viridae 01:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Coolumbine

The language used is in violation of this policy: WP:AWW. Viridae 01:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

the word realists violates the policy above. It is not neutral. Viridae 01:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Warren G. Harding edit

You added the following line to the Warren G. Harding section of Notable Ku Klux Klan members in national politics on May 18, 2006:

Despite all the evidence against Harding being in the Klan we must remember that absence of proof is not proof of absence.

I would ask that in the future that you refrain from making such weak logical, POV associations. Such a statement does not meet a test of basic logic, nor is it NPOV in the context in which you used it. Stude62 22:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Bill Durston on Misplaced Pages. 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. 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. TheJC _{Contributions} 21:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

vandalisms

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Hmains 04:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit summary

What is the meaning of this edit summary?

• (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/UT2004goatse.jpg)

It's hard to see what a goatse image could have to do with Grass Valley. Please disucss yuor edits on the talk page before reverting again. -Will Beback 18:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

dKosopedia

Misplaced Pages articles cannot include "original research" (see the link for how it is defined). We need to rely on secondary sources that meet our standard for reliable sources. There are two parts to your insertion - one is that the (unnamed) person is a Marxist, and that people find this disturbing. You would need to find a reliable source for this information - someone else who has written about it, etc. The other issue is whether this is encyclopaedic. Why is this information significant? Is it a significant part of what makes dKosopedia worthy of an encyclopaedia article? If you believe it is, you need to make the case for this, make a case that this bit of trivia, if true, is significant. Guettarda 01:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Attacks on North America

Can we discuss my proposal instead of you reverting it? Other people may have opinions too. Shimbo 19:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Carl Sheeler

Is there some kind of problem with Carl Sheeler? You have removed his mention from Democratic Underground twice now, asking for evidence. I reverted again, and added a link to his campaign site this time. Is that good enough evidence for you? Rather than just removing it, you could have added a fact tag, or at least posted something about it on the talk page. Unless you know something about it that the rest of the world doesn't, please don't remove it again. When he loses badly, he still qualifies for the section with a little rewording to change tense. Crockspot 02:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Thom Robb

Your recent edit to Thom Robb (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Misplaced Pages 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 17:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

List of notable graffiti posses

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. 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 List of notable graffiti posses, 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 hard work of others. Thanks. duncan 06:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC) ==Please Use Edit Summaries==

When editing an article on Misplaced Pages there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Wikipediarules2221 22:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks in edit summaries

Regarding this edit summary Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Misplaced Pages has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Crockspot 18:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Cassie Bernall

Do not hyphenate "did not" on this page, you are using those hyphens incorectly. The official investigation DID claim that the exchange did not take place, but others say it did, but by hyphenating the "did not" you are making it seems as if the official investigation may or may have not said that when they clearly did. The urban legend and exchange have already been covered in the article and this hyphenation, while being used incorrectly, is also unecessary. Thank You. -- SmthManly / / 19:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Edits to United States Senate election, 2006

If you want to include the line about Talent's supporters thinking he won't win, it might help if you credited the comment to Paul Gibbs of the Missouri Cattleman's Association and linked a reliable source which would be http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060817-114632-9545r_page2.htm. --Bobblehead 21:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page 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. VoiceOfReason 23:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of Grazon
• Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets