User talk:Projects
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Stalin birth date
Well, finally changed with two birthdays. And I was right from the very start, as usual!
Reply
WELL, THEN GROW UP, WHAT AGREEMENT ON THIS SITE, IF EVERYBODY SAYS 1879, THEN IT'S 1879, YOU PEOPLE CALL THIS NEUTRAL ENCYCLOPEDIA, YOU ARE GOING AGAINST MAJORITY!
[edit] I just checked again
Some idiot keeps on changing stalin's death, do know you are talking here to a history teacher and an author on historical subjects and I do not appreciate having my things changed and I do not appreciate, i really do not have time for this, i suggest you block others for screwing my stories. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Projects (talk • contribs).
Looper, you get a life, block me, for what I care, I have access to 10 different IP's and we can do this for next 10 years or you can grow up and understand few points about facts and life, insted of using pro languange and making it look you are right, when in reality you are not and the rest of yours...
What do you mean by #6? I am typind from normal keyboard, what? As far as Stalin goes, you are the only person in the world who keeps on changing his date, on Polish wikipedia and on every biography,the date I put is the correct date!
As far as G Reeves, I agree, this is not the place to start something or petition, however, I am stressing the fact on this man or on what is going on and interest people have, I am not saying come and join, well, if that line is there, u can delete it, but everything else makes sense.
- He means (for #6) to put four ~'s at the end of your messages so that it signs them. Else click on the signature button in the edit box (second button from right at top of edit box).-localzuk 20:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Rocky Day
Hi, I have done some work on the article mentioned and you have removed the templates asking for further input from the community. Please remember that this site is a community site and as such anyone can alter any article. Once an article is created it is not your property. Please refrain from removing the tags in future. If you would like to discuss it, please do so on the article's talk page. -localzuk 20:49, 30 December 2005 (UTC) Reply
- That's ok, I have no problem with that, but stop changing facts on it! Well, not my property? I am boxing historian and things I know very, very few people know, so appreciate it, ok...
- Please stop using multiple accouts. You are only permitted to use a single account on wikipedia. Also, as stated before you must cite sources. And finally, please sign your posts. It is done by using the signature button (second in from right at top of edit box) or by typing for tildes (~'s).-localzuk 21:38, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Reply to the reply? Do you call that a reply? And can you spell correctly, what is tildes? Nobody has two accounts, we have access to this project from same IP.
Block what, go ahead, now listen... many of the bios we posted here, got that boy, we are not deleting but adding simple facts, ok I am sick of you and will report you to your administrators, accept and respect our time and stop editing our usage page. No thank you, you do not know the facts nor are you a qualified historain.
- Ehahah! And the administrators will only tell you to stop vandalizing. Search4Lancer 18:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- I am having difficulty figuring out what your gripe with me is. I have simply been trying to get the community involved by putting templates that ask for 1: copyediting (due to the style of writing being too informal) and 2: sources (every fact that is in every article needs to be backed up with a reference, be that a book, website, journal etc...). It is not to get at you, or the article. It is simply to encourage the community to get involved and improve the article - as such I put templates on dozens of articles (as well as tag some for deletion, alter some and create some). Constantly removing the templates will cause issues - as other people will not know the article needs work and won't help. This leads to things such as the article for deletion nomination that now sits on the article. If you had left the there, someone may have come along and fixed the tone of the article and some others may provide sources.
Also, as I stated before it does not matter if you are a historian, lecturer, or any other qualified person - if you don't provide sources the information *will* be deleted as it is not verifiable. I have contacted the administrators about your behaviour and as such, I believe that is why the article was nominated for deletion. Also note that using sock puppets (take a look at the policies) is frowned upon and also is not allowed if you are using them purely to cause trouble (which in this case it appears you are doing). I was willing to help with the article, as I showed by wikifying it and copyediting the grammar. I did not/do not always have time to do everything on each article. I do not know enough about boxing to decipher the technical terms in this article so do not feel that my rewriting it would be advantageous (as I may damage the information) - so I tried to add the copyedit template. I hope you grow up at some point, and if indeed you are a history teacher do not treat your students in the same way you have treated me and my attempt at helping you. -localzuk 18:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC) --
- It is not me. Wikipedia has a set of rules - these rules include No Original Research, Cite your sources and is it verifiable. If these are not adhered to then the encylopedia would become disorganised/chaotic. I do not give out email addresses to people I do not know either. My advice is that if you want to get information out about your topics which does not have a trackable, verifiable source, your best bet is to publish a paper on it. Then it will be a source and can be peer reviewed and included as a source in this project. Also, if a source is not fully known then any articles/papers created from it can be flaky at best - this is a commonly accepted realisation of lecturers, historians, teachers, professors and anyone else who publishes research. -localzuk 19:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Say What
Banned, ok, I dont mind that much you delete george reeves project, but damn you, you deleted the talk page, which indicates why was it deleted, you call yourself fair... oh no, this is not acceptable boy... and it will not be! You live in your own world of your own rules which you think are fair, but only to you and yours... Personal attacks, disruption? Grow up boy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Projects&action=history I do not appreciate being linked to this maniac Dijxtra who may have links to neo nazis... And the evidence of sucket puppet is inconclusive, since this guy may be connected with other names/users as well, since his IP is same compared to few others...
[edit] WARNING FOR AHOLES, ESPECIALLY CURPS
LIKE CURPS AND THE REST WHO THINK THEY CAN BLOCK ALL IP'S. YOU WILL PAY FOR THIS, YOU ARE DELETING GOOD SITES, UNDER THE NAME THAT YOU ARE DOING JUSTICE AND NO POV, BUT YOU ARE CONFUSED IN YOUR OWN WORLD BY CREATING YOUR OWN JUSTICE, YOU BECOME IGNORANT, IP'S BLOCK WILL BE NO PROBLEM NO MORE, WAR IS ON AGAINST YOU SCUMBAGS AND PEOPLE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO POST ON YOUR SITES, AS YOU DESERVE IT... YOU WILL PAY FOR VANDALISM!
[edit] Thats pretty good
Im just watching this site, says I am impersonator of some users, lol, THIS IS GOOD, I DONT EVEN KNOW THEM, LOL...
[edit] Battle goes on
Against Wiki Vandals and more is here.. http://geocities.com/georgereevesproject/wikipedia.html For all to see, now we moved underground, you scumbags will not trace us... HEROSTRATUS IS A REAL VANDAL HERE...
[edit] Whatever
Well, it was obvious heros and other vandal administrators simply did not want to correct few websites and all these things blew out of control, herostratus seemed nice, we observed, but underneath his goal was simply to be an administrator thru this dude, now what a lousy administrator he is. Of course, if you want to do good, when you do, nobody ever says anything about it.
