User talk:69.183.123.228

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Tell me, why MUST this BS about Boston be central to your description of New England? I dspute the fact that Boston is no hub for CT and I even brought proof, while prodive none about Boston being a hb for CT. I agree that Boston is the largest city in New England - that is fact. It is no hub - that is fiction. Keep the changes that I made as that I see is a good compomise since I never agrees with a lot of it anyway.

You changing CT to "extreme southwestern corner" of New England implies that CT sees itself not only from a New England perspective, but also as south western New England, which is totally untrue.

Boston is the most populous city, CT also does not have one universal opinion once everyone from Hartford votes if they should be considered from New England, then I will change that opinion. It's impossible to gage what you consider to be part of a region, but just because you believe it doesn't necessarily make it a fact. It needs to be proved. All you have to go on is your opinions, New England is widely considered to inculde CT. I know for a fact it is disputed, but that does not give CT special rights, since western Mass and other places could feel the same way. Again, some people could feel Bostonian roots. It's impossible to tell. Comment if you need anything, Yanksox 01:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia 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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. 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. Kuru talk 02:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Does the same go for the person changing mine or is this just for anyone who tells the truth in an article instead of propaganda? We can keep this up for years. You block the truth, I put it back up. As you can see, I have patience.

If you want to avoid getting your changes reverted, check out the Manual of Style, WP:NPOV, How to write a great article, the Tutorial, and Vandalism. Emmett5 03:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

"The following rules do not claim to be the last word on Wikipedia style. One way is often as good as any other,"

[edit] Your reverts to Gandhi

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Lost 04:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I get tired of you guys claiming vandelism simply because you don't like or want historic facts out there. This time I put cites... I also notice that when I edit countries or peoples, the people who call my edits 'vandelism' are of those groups and want to cotinue revistionst history. I feel that if it is out there - tell it all. You may not like it, but it's not lie.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --69.145.123.171 04:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --69.145.123.171 04:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for repeated vandalism. If or when the block expires, please refrain from vandalizing or this account will face longer blocks, and action could be taken against the individual who uses it. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/9/2E/User_talk%7E69.183.123.228.html"