User talk:203.57.68.20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is suspected that this user may be a sock puppet, meat puppet or impersonator of Jackp.
Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jackp for evidence. See block log
Notes for the suspect Notes for the accuser

Contents

[edit] Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jackp for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. CRCulver 12:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sydney

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. Titoxd(?!?) 07:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Message to Jackp

Jackp, have you noticed that the wikipedia community is very good at working out your various "socks", either logged-in or with anon IP? Look again and you will see that these edits ALWAYS get removed. So the question is, why do you bother?

[edit] Hit the Road

You wrote: Why do I need to hit the road? Every edit I make to London's page, like removing all that "famous for its culture"....it's put back in, then when I do it to Sydney's its removed, it is total bias! Do you or anyone else seriously doubt that Sydney isn't renowned for its spectacular natural setting, culture, arts and media? I mean c'mon! It's perfectly all well and good to say that Sydney is renowned for its beaches and landmarks, but when it comes to culture and that, you go all shitty and remove it....can you prove that Sydney is famed for its culture, I doubt it!!!! I can even back up my edits with a source, why can't you just relax and leave it there, because it’s ALL TURE!!!!! 203.57.68.20 13:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Your edits continue to be lousy, but that is not why they are being removed. Frankly, we don't actually care what you write anymore. Rather, they are being removed because it has been overwhelmingly agreed that you and your socks are a disruption to wikipedia and thus you are banned indefinitely. Thus, a number of us are making sure that none of your edits remains on any topic (see for yourself). This is advice of several administrators. End of discussion. --Merbabu 13:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My message

You know what, you did nothing wrong - I am terribly sorry! My warning was intended for User talk:212.135.1.83. Again, please accept my apologies and I have removed the warning (and will ensure you are on the administrator whitelist :) Thanks for letting my know, and keep up the great work - Glen 13:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

PS; Why dont you create an account?
  1. Its completely anonymous (much more so than your IP address which tells me lots of info about you - like you're from Aussie :)
  2. No personal info is required (not even your email address)
  3. You can participate in community discussions like article deletion and featured article discussions
  4. You could be promoted to administrator :)
Interested?? - Glen 13:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sydney again

Please don't cite Answers.com as a source when you full know that their information is a delayed mirror of Wikipeda. If you want to say that Sydney produces "more than a quarter of Australia’s wealth" e.g. [1], you're going to have to cite a reliable source such as the Australian Bureau of Statistics or Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry etc. --  Netsnipe  ►  11:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paris

Please don't remove sourced information from Paris to disruptively make a point. Consider this your final warning. --  Netsnipe  ►  12:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The reason I moved content from Paris’s heading was because it was looking like a tourist brochure…rather than stating facts about the city, plus nothing has been “removed’, it has just been shortened. The bit about Paris being the center for France’s wealth, well that was already stated in the economy. 203.57.68.20 12:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

You actually removed the insee.fr reference on France's GDP from the article entirely, if you hadn't realised it. --  Netsnipe  ►  12:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked again

It's become fairly obvious through your most recent edits to Port Jackson that you're going out of your way to disrupt Wikipedia through your persistent insertion of non-neutral commentary praising locations in Sydney and circumventing the original block placed on Jackp for exactly the same reason. Despite inadvertently giving you a second chance by my accidental lifting of the initial autoblock, you have failed to take heed of Wikipedia's policies on WP:NPOV and WP:MOS despite frequent complaints by your fellow editors. --  Netsnipe  ►  12:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Halloween

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --James Bond 02:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked?

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | unblock | contribs) asked to be unblocked, but an administrator or other user has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators or users can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). This unblock request continues to be visible. Do not replace this message with another unblock request nor add another unblock request.

Request reason: "why was I blocked again, I didn't even do anything wrong!"

Decline reason: "This IP is used by indefinately blocked Jackp, who is using it to circumvent his/her block. Per Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jackp. Daniel.Bryant 03:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)"

This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.

[edit] Block Expire Time?

Shouldn't my block have expired by now? Six months is over. 203.57.68.20 05:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../2/0/3/User_talk%7E203.57.68.20.html"