User talk:62.25.106.209

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This IP address is part of the range 62.25.96.0 - 62.25.111.255 owned by Energis plc. It is regularly used by employees and customers of that company, and by bona fide editors, of whom User:Nick Boulevard is one, as well as by vandals, as evidenced below.

If you would only log in, we could thank you for the editing you've done to bring Gospel of Barnabas up to scratch. --Wetman 11:10, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I am echoing Wetman's thoughts. Get an account. Your edits are great. Refdoc 12:08, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I see others have beaten me to it in congratulating you on your work. Get an account or don't, but keep it up! - Mustafaa 20:31, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Re: Jack Silver. Thanks 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. Thanks. - BanyanTree 16:04, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as John England, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. For more information about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, take a look at our Five Pillars. Happy editing! – Ryan Delaney talk 14:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Your edit was factually incorrect, therefore, I undid it. Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon unequivocally condemned Natan-Zada's actions, calling them "a reprehensible act by a bloodthirsty Jewish terrorist" Thanks. El_C 17:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Israel's definition of terrorism

You deleted my amendment regarding Israel's definition of terrorism on the page about Zionist terrorism, claiming that it was factually incorrect. My edit explained that Israeli law does not classify Jewish Israelis who commit terrorist acts as terrorists, nor any victims of Jewish Israeli-acts of terror as victims of terrorism. You think and claim that this is factually incorrect because Ariel Sharon condemned the particular act in question as a "terrorist" act. Please read the following BBC article to learn why you do not seem to understand the difference between national law and political statements: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4198754.stm - I look forward to seeing you restore my edits very quickly. And start getting your "facts" right. 62.25.106.209 18:05, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I understand the difference, I just misread that; thanks for the correction. I restored your addition. El_C 18:10, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Regarding your edits on Jat it is not correct that Jats are mostly Muslims. burdak 11:55, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. - Trevor MacInnis(Talk | Contribs) 15:41, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Try saying what the "nonsense" is specifically before making unsubstantiated accusations here. How very arrogant of you. 86.17.208.173 22:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
    • You ignore the definition of "nonsense" in the Wiki context: anything someone with an account doesn't like.

[edit] test

meh

[edit] December 21, 2005

This message is regarding the page Secret Santa. Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. -- MisterHand 13:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neoplatonism

Hey 62, could you tell us how much of the material you recently added to Neoplatonism is copyrighted text by so-and-so published by Routledge, and how much is your own work? I think there's no problem using a direct quotation if it's short, properly cited, and necessary – and it must be set off with quotation marks! (inverted commas) Best, QuartierLatin1968 Image:Flag of Anarcho syndicalism.svg 03:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Can you point out which of your edits were taken wholesale from other people's work? Jkelly 22:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] May 2006

Thank you for experimenting with the page Big Brother (Magazine) 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. --Liface 01:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] June 2006

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Epsilon. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

specific edit reference | User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 10:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Info on Edits made using this IP address

Unfortunately you can see that there is a mixture of comments here, mainly because this IP address is covered by a number of people under Energis, which is a British Government-department contractor.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to User:Mjk2357, 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. Lo2u 13:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Death worship

This subject has nothing to do with simple veneration or worship of the dead (as opposed to accusations of glorification of death as something positive in itself). Please don't add irrelevant material to this article.... AnonMoos 15:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Surrealism, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. KOS | talk 14:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peoples' Global Action

Hi, could you reply to my comments on the Peoples' Action talk page concerning the disputed paragraph? Thanks, Addhoc 18:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Wayne Rooney

Your recent edit to Wayne Rooney (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. // Tawkerbot4 15:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About Racism

Your family on this link below? Whites are all monsters? You can live with these people, if you want. Just let me live with the people I prefer. That's fair isn't it? http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/wanted.html

[edit] Lindsay Lohan

Thank you for your edit to this article. Your changes have been reverted for two reasons: one, per the Wikipedia Manual of style, only country of origin and/or citizenship should go in the lead paragraph; two, to refer to Ms. Lohan as Irish-American without also mentioning Italian-American is inaccurate. Please feel free to write me if you have any questions. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 13:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Mr. T

Your recent edit to Mr. T (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 14:36, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U2

What do you have against describing the band as being Irish? Please discuss in talk before making any more of these edits. Thanks. --Guinnog 12:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

What I am against is countless contributors who insist that a band made up of two Irish and two Brits must always be referred to using the phrase "Irish band U2" but are constantly trying to find ways not to say "British" in The Edge and Clayton's articles. Please explain why, in an article about a musician, you MUST say that his band is Irish. It's irrelevant - the fact is stated in the U2 article. You have inconsistent standards. Leave your politics at the door. 195.92.40.49 12:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
PS If of a person you are not allowed to say (paraphrasing) "British born in Britain" why are you allowed to say of U2 "Irish formed in Ireland"? Is there a minimum quota for the term?
Irrespective of the members nationality, the band (singular entity) is Irish. It's all been said before (it wouldn't surprise me if you were involved under another name). Aren't there better things to do? --Merbabu 13:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
You miss the point completely. There are contributors here - including with accounts - who insist that The Edge and Clayton should not be described as British yet the band must be described as Irish. So by this logic one should not refer to the nationality of an individual, but must do so for a group of individuals (without even going into the 50/50 issue). Let's hear your defence of that - politics masquerading as policy. I'm happy for U2 to be constantly and forevermore referred to as "Irish group U2" (where it is actually relevant) if others will allow two men born in Britain, with UK passports and no dual nationality to be referred to specifically as British (dirty word for some of you, I know) in their biographical entries. Can't have it both ways. Just remember who is the one asking for consistency here. 195.92.40.49 14:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, it’s been implied a few times now that this some sort of political game. Being neither Irish or British, personally, I really couldn’t care less, I just want to see hard non-debatable facts, rather than commentary on which country can claim him - and I suggest that this is the case for most editors. Is the pushing of the term “British” over “Irish” anymore political? Dropping both terms and sticking to the facts is what I suggest. Also, I suggest people immediately stop insisting they know more about other editors’ own motivations and start assuming good faith.
As for the actual topic at hand, to get the most accurate statements, the questions of nationality of a person, and the “nationality” of a band must be separated, even if that person is a member of the band. Your claim that is inconsistency is irrelevant, actually even to be expected. ie, one doesn’t judge oranges and apples in the same way. Sure, bricks make up a house and have an influence on the nature of the house, but one judges brick’s and a house separately and by different criteria. Thus:
  • The Band as a singular entity: formed in Ireland, remains based in Ireland, as does is its management, is described by the members of the band themselves as a Irish band.
  • Edge. I think people are disagreeing on notions of nationality and identity. There is the official but often meaningless notion of what one’s passport says (unless you are at the immigration counter in the airport). Then there is the more significant notion of one’s identity. For most people, what is in their passport and their identity is the same thing. He spent 1 year (which I doubt he remembers) living in the UK, not of his own choosing. Has since lived 44 out of his 45 years in Ireland – which experience do you think has shaped him more? He’s spent 25 years (or more) at an age when he can choose where he wants to live – it’s Ireland. His family live there including children, he conducts his live largely from Ireland. Apart from U2-related activity, how much time does he spend in the UK? If, hypothetically, he walked into whatever govt department he needs to, and changes his citizenship and passport to Irish, has anything actually changed for him, apart from the colour of his passport? He is still the same person. What is written on a piece of paper, is not as significant to these characteristics of his identity.
Despite all that, I am not proposing that the article states he is Irish (even though it would be a better choice than he is British if one had to be chosen). I simply think that the article should list the facts (birth place, chosen place of residence, etc) as the article currently does, rather than try and "claim" him as one or the other.--Merbabu 01:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Re your second tiret, I find it astounding that you place your own uninformed and speculative opinions of a stranger's feelings above concrete facts such as place of birth; lineage; heritage; citizenship. You are editing on the basis of your assumptions. I could easily argue that his (and Clayton's) not giving up their UK passport and citizenship is an indication that they are proud to be, and wish to remain, British! Yes, you make reasonable points in general about notions of nationality and identity, but in this specific case unless these points are based on your knowledge of The Edge's personal beliefs then you are basing an encyclopeadic biographical entry on pure guesswork, and nothing more. Doesn't that bode well for accuracy.... 86.17.246.29 12:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
PS My stepfather was born in Dublin to Irish parents. He was brought up in Britain from the age of 11. He served in the Royal Navy, fought in the Falklands, then worked for Royal Mail for 20 years. He is a member of the British Legion. Guess what ? He says he is Irish, 100%. Are you going to tell him "NO! You are BRITISH!". Who are you to tell him he is wrong and abandon where and what he comes from simply because he resides elsewhere? This isn't France.... 86.17.246.29 12:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
What is a tiret? is it similar to a tirade? I think yours is more a tirade with all your exclamation marks - mine was long but calm. Your stepfather's example if anything only proves my point. Ie, you correctly point out that it is up to the person. All of this is still entirely irrelevant because what is in the article is undisputable (ie, born in UK, raised in Ireland, has UK passport). All disputed info is based on our assumptions and interpretations (ie, like your stepfather's example) as been removed from the article, so i really don't know what your problem is. To say is either Irish or British needs more than what his passport says and to say either is based on assumption. So unless anyone can find WP:RS that categorically says he identifies as being ether British or Irish then i suggest issue is closed. Article correctly states undisputable facts only. thanks --Merbabu 01:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Howick Falls

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, puerile edits, such as those you made to Howick Falls, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing. Please consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. Beve 13:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To whomever knows about the School Board for London

I've examined official papers produced by the Board and by the government setting it up and come across both 'London School Board' and 'School Board for London' being referred to as its official name. Is there a definitive answer? Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 16:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to RBX, 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. codetiger 10:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Leeds, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Gwernol 18:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/2/2E/User_talk%7E62.25.106.209.html"