User talk:81.225.195.17

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This message is regarding the page Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Tempus Spatium. Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 00:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

_ _ This is addressed to any person with responsibility for any of these these 16 edits]. (Innocent bystanders, if any, please be patient and please leave me a note at User talk:Jerzy or send me EMail using the link on that page.)
_ _ OK, Jocko, you're busted, and you've used up your newbie's leniency. 15 of those edits, and the one after, all came after you got that warning. I had decided that no one ever reverted you with any critique beyond easily ignorable summary notes, and that the only clearly proscribed act was on the Tempus Spatium AfD, where there are clear do-not-edit notices at top and bottom. I was going to block you for 12 hours, a slap on the hand. Two or three of those 17 edits were just about your apparent notion that you own the idea of "turn" meaning a turn of the earth, and of a millionth of a day being an interesting fraction; those are more laughable, asserted once via an edit, than aggressive. But all the rest were serious, and turn out to come after you were warned by ESkog.
_ _ Barring evidence to the contrary, i assume you are the same person as User:Aescher. I and others may judge other IPs or logins to be controlled by you, based ontiming and similarity of behavior.
_ _ Your IP is blocked for 48 hours, and User:Aescher for 24.
_ _ Until you convince me otherwise, you will be blocked each time you
  1. Remove anything about "Aescher" or User:Aescher or "Dorion Aescher" that has been saved on WP, whether by you or someone else. If you want to correct some error about you by contradicting a false statement or explaining a misconception, that's good. If you want to convince someone to retract their statement about you, there's nothing wrong with that. (I counsel you, however, that your attempts to flatly insist on references to you and your work being removed are likely IMO to produce resentment toward you and interfere with your ability to influence those who have said things you find problematic.)
  2. Make a change to any other user's contribution on a talk (or other discussion) page from any namespace, without attaching an annotation signed using the four-tilde markup (--~~~~) making it clear what you have done and why.
  3. Remove information anywhere on WP without a reasonably convincing explanation of at least 5 words in the summary field.
  4. Change any information in a way that doesn't make obvious to most editors what you think is improved, without a serious attempt to explain it in the summary or on the corresponding talk page. (If you're looking for rehabilitating yourself here, doing constructive edits within that is the best way to get started, and can quickly loosen that limitation.)
_ _ At this point i find it hard to imagine you persisting in violations of WP:NLT enough to provoke more than reversion from me. If you violate it (or push around the edges of it via ambiguity) i will quick-revert you, which means everything you've done on the same page, even in multiple edits, since the last other editor, goes out. (Any such collateral damage is not a means of punishment, it's just less of a burden for me to do it that way.)
_ _ If you are convinced that you have a legal claim for removal something, other than something that you
  • wrote, and
  • have never placed in the public domain, and
  • have never submitted to a GFDL-based (or otherwise copy-left-based) wiki or the like,
write to info-en@wikimedia.org but do not mention it in any edit. What you've been doing is like going into a theater during the movie and screaming about the studio having stolen your idea, or broken their contract with you. It differs in that there you are a lot more likely to get fined or thrown in jail, and in that here we can muffle the disturbance much more easily and thoroughly. Don't even discuss it here: the lawyers aren't listening, and if they were, they wouldn't let us make the decisions about whose claims to honor and whose to dismiss. Even if you were explaining your claims, instead of issuing orders like a monarch.
_ _ With hopes that you'll turn into a colleague, or at least go away happier than you've been, thanks for reading this far.
--Jerzy•t 23:09, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../8/1/2E/User_talk%7E81.225.195.17.html"