User talk:172.203.70.132

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
  1. Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to User:IronChris, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. IronChris | (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
  2. Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Joseph Stalin. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. digital_me(Talk)(Contribs) 18:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
  3. This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Gwernol 18:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
  4. Please do not remove or modify warnings on your page. If you don't like them, stop vandalising articles and you won't get them. And don't talk to me about WP:CIVIL with edit summaries such as "Line contradicts the next sentence of the intro. how dumb" or "READ THE DAMN SENTENCE". IronChris | (talk) 18:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

That's interesting; I got several for making points on this page without vandalising articles. Talk about a broad interpretation of vandalism. It would seem some think its a broad policy where you get to shut people up who you don't agree with. Good gravy.

My apologies if you were offended by my remarks. It was not intended. More a case of if you see large capital letters, you might read the explanation before writing it off as vandalism straight off. 172.203.70.132 19:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Reverting edits to my own talk page because they're incorrect and out of place isn't vandalism, and is arguably, a content dispute, sir. Wow have things gone down hill since I left. I'm glad I carried out this little "testing of the ground" so to speak. 172.203.70.132 18:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Blocked
You have been blocked for vandalism for 24 hours. To contest this block, add the text {{unblock}} on this page, along with an explanation of why you believe this block to be unjustified. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username (if you have one) and IP address in your email.

Please do not erase warnings on this page. Doing so is also considered vandalism.

--Kungfu Adam (talk) 18:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

How can I plausibly be blocked for arguing over template usage in line with policy? No one has bothered answering any of the valid questions I asked and this is one of the most blatant breaches of Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers.

Never mind, it was your choice. Your blind incompetance in applying policy will be clear for all too see in my "report". Thank you for your time. 172.203.70.132 18:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Come on, you said yourself you're not a newcomer. "Wow, have things gone down hill since I left.", etc. We're not fooled. If you want to argue with policy do so on the talk page of said policy, not by vandalizing articles and user pages. romarin[talk to her ] 18:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
"Confusion is a tool in spotting weakness"
Lets make one thing clear, I was making a point that it wasn't an official template, which had any de jure or even de facto jurisdiction. You're not allowed to make your custom own AFD or db templates and warning templates are the same. It would seem that new template was added to policy by one user all of 12 or so hours ago. The simple answer would have been to explain that it was now official policy, but instead I was warned again and this dragged out without reason. If you had looked at the times, you'd see I had already given up on them by the time I started making frivolous ArbCom remarks in my comments.
Minor disruption (Even if blatantly in the face of WP:POINT is a small price to pay in gaining knowledge of how policy is being applied. Its invaluable, but is in fact underestimated as a tool and seen as Hoodoo to some. But ask yourself one question: would a simple vandal be well versed in various elements of Wikipedia policy? Every system, Every organisation.... Every business has its Audits. 172.203.70.132 19:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The template {{test4}} was created on April 14, 2004 (first edition). That's a little bit more than 12 hours. IronChris | (talk) 19:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I am referencing added by Conrad Devonshire this morning to WP:VAND. It was used by Digitalme to warn me and I was under the impression that it wasn't policy: it could have easily being pointed out as being such. Furthermore, I was getting warned for something I'd already being warned for. 172.203.70.132 19:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Conrad Devonshire did not create {{Test4im}} this morning. It was created on November 18, 2005 by Pathoschild (first edit). Besides, you crossed out a {{test4}} template. IronChris | (talk) 20:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I said added to WP:VAND not created. I was right earlier, you really can't read can you? I also crossed out the template 4 as I was disputing the use of the template and not vandalising. 172.141.31.118 16:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, well, well, isn't that funny: someone who is so strict about the enforcement of Wikipedia policies but ignores WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. What irony. IronChris | (talk) 01:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../1/7/2/User_talk%7E172.203.70.132.html"