User talk:129.241.134.241

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This user also contributes as User:Wet Dilkes. - Ted Wilkes 21:49, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Do not update the results of the World Snooker Championship before the final has finished!! If you repeat this edit, you will be barred from editing Wikipedia. -- Arwel 21:35, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --W(t) 23:30, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Elvis Presley

Please stop adding linkspam to the Elvis Presley article. If you have something to discuss about this, please do so at the bottom of the article's talk page. Thanks. Wyss 16:58, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

You have made comments on the Talk:Elvis Presley and User talk:Onefortyone pages that violate Wikipedia:Civility and referring to me as "fight our common enemy" is a violation of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Forming an alliance to "fight our common enemy" and to prevent others from editing and avoiding the Wikipedia:Three revert rule for themselves and their ally, contravenes Wikipedia:Policy. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Arbitration policy/Precedents#Civility / disruption / reasonableness and see if you can then work in a spirit of cooperation by providing reasons for your edit reversions so that consensus, based on facts, can be achieved. Thank you. Ted Wilkes 10:29, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Removing Vandalism"

Please stop referring to your linkspam additions as "removing vandalism". You may have already violated the three-revert rule, for which you could be blocked. Wyss 17:11, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

- Look, whether you like it or not, my sentence will stay on the site. I may take breaks now and then, but I'll keep fighting until I'm 92 and die of a natural cause. You violate the NPOV rule by removing something you think of as controversial and / or offencive, whereas I see it in no different fashion than the "et tu, Brutus" explamation before the death of Caesar. I never claimed that Elvis died defecating. I only claim that many people think he died - he was fat, probably had constipation problems. Have you ever had it yourself? It's difficult to force the poo out, your pulse raises etc...It's perfectly plausible that this could have happened to Elvis.

Yes, Elvis Presley probably did have constipation problems. Meanwhile, please stop referring to your edits as "removing vandalism". I tried to enter the "Elvis on the crapper" legend in the trivia section, but someone less tolerant than me about that sort of stuff removed it. Wyss 01:26, 26 July 2005 (UTC)


- Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_caesar#Assassination

The infamous sentence "et tu, Brute" is in the "assasination" section, not some trivia section. So I don't see why the "constipation" thing should be anywhere but the "Death and burial" section.

Wyss, you're a Wikipedian. Don't you see a problem with some articles being written by such passionate people that there is no shred of objectivity left? If I back down, I would have to admit to myself that NPOV is only an unreachable ideal, not something real.

[edit] cc for posting to Wikipedia Administrator DropDeadGorgias

Your Three-revert rule block I'm sorry you chose to use your discretionary authority to block me for my violation of the Three-revert rule. I was wrong to attempt to deal with a user with the editing history of Anonymous User:129.241.134.241 [1] who had already been severely reprimanded for his misconduct by Wikipedia Administrator Arwel Parry. However, after my most courteous and civil of cautions (Talk:Elvis Presley#Notice to Anonymous User:129.241.134.241) to him on the article's talk page regarding his abusive conduct and declaration that he will prevent me from editing, I did invite him to "work in a spirit of cooperation." I also most politely informed him that previous and continued personal attacks were unacceptable at Wikipedia and I followed Wikipedia:Policy and cautioned Anonymous User:129.241.134.241 that I would revert his personal attacks in accordance with Wikipedia:No personal attacks#Remedies. Unfortunately, User:129.241.134.241 added more personal attacks in the edit comments when he followed up on his threats as per Item 1 below and reverted the edit to his "SUPER version."

It appears I must have misunderstood the Remedies definition, for which I sincerely apologize to you, Wikipedia Administrator:DropDeadGorgias, and to every person currently working in good faith at Wikipedia. And to every person who may ever come to edit at Wikipedia, let this be a lesson: my conduct was indeed in violation of the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule that authorizes, a Wikipedia Administrator, if they deem the situation appropriate, to place a temporary 24 hour block on the violator.

Note that despite posting my fully documented reasons for my edit on the Talk page, Anonymous User:129.241.134.241 was reverting my edits ONLY because he declared to his partner User:Wyss he would do so. The History page [2] for the article upon which I violated the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule shows that in addition to Anonymous User:129.241.134.241's revert containing his threat as per Item 1 below, he made eleven reverts back to the "SUPER version" by his partner User:Wyss before I was blocked.

Strange, though, when Anonymous User:129.241.134.241's partner User:Wyss showed up and read the documented facts I had posted to the Talk page at the time of my very first edit, User:Wyss inserted my factual information: the same information her partner had reverted on her behalf eleven times.

Thank you. Again I apologize. I violated the Three-revert rule and you were absolutely right to temporarily block me. Perhaps you could you tell me when your block on Anonymous User:129.241.134.241 expires? Or did you deem his conduct appropriate and use your discretion to not block him too? Ted Wilkes 15:36, August 11, 2005 (UTC)


Some user contributions [3] for Anonymous User:129.241.134.241

  • Item 1) - 10 August 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley (This will from now on be referred to as the SUPER version. In the trivia, there are mentions about constipations and gayness. The SONY thing has been removed. I will in the future revert to this exact)
  • Item 2) - 02:01, 5 August 2005 (hist) (diff) Talk:Elvis Presley ( Constipation, God Damn It! )
  • Item 3) - 01:28, 27 July 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley ( Removed the #1 thing. I f***ing hate elvis fanatics)
  • Item 4) - 21:51, 2 May 2005 (hist) (diff) World Snooker Championship ( fuck you Arwel. I know I'm right)

129.241.134.241 - It has been brought to my attention by User:Ted Wilkes that you also violated the 3RR during the time in question. Your edits here:

  1. 08:04, August 10, 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley (Reverted to last version. Wilkes keeps violating the 3 revert rule)
  2. 07:36, August 10, 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley (removing vandalism by Ted Wilkes)
  3. 07:07, August 10, 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley (Removed vandalism by Wilkes, who has repeatedly boken the 3rr without explaining himself)
  4. 06:36, August 10, 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley (Removed vandalism by Ted Wilkes)
  5. 04:58, August 10, 2005 (hist) (diff) Elvis Presley (Ted Wilkes is ONCE again in violation of the 3rr. Reverted back to the last HOARY version)

were also in volation of the 3RR. Your account will be blocked for 24 hours. Keep in mind that even reversions of 3RR violations count as reversions themselves. Please follow the 3RR in the future when you return. Cheers. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:11, August 11, 2005 (UTC)


Please note that on the talk page for User:DropDeadGorgias I made an error. I stated that Anonymous User:129.241.134.241 reverted the same item (transistor radios) eleven times. I was wrong and I do apologize. It was nine reverts, the SUPER edit should not have been counted.

These are the other four reverts within the 24 hr. period:

6) 23:25, August 9, 2005 129.241.134.241 (Removed the Sony thing once again. This is my 3rd revert in the last 24 hrs, because my last one a responce to Ted Wilkes' violation of the 3rr)

7) 21:38, August 9, 2005 129.241.134.241 (Ted Wilkes has just reverted the article 4 times in the last 24 hours.)

8) 21:19, August 9, 2005 129.241.134.241 (Removed vandalism by Ted Wilkes)

9) 20:33, August 9, 2005 129.241.134.241 (Reverted to the last WYSS version)

- Ted Wilkes 12:54, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Supposed 'Wikipedia Consensus' regarding Onefortyone

As I've said on the Talk:Elvis Presley page, I don't feel your notice in response to any post by Onefortyone is appropriate. ...I think the easiest thing is just to cut and paste what I said.

"I don't agree with either the spirit or the wording. There are clear places on Wikipedia to get input from the community as a whole, such as WP:RFC. Whilst almost everyone who's come across the Elvis Presley rumours on this talk page, and on related articles, has felt they're unencylopaedic, that can't be claimed as a Wikipedia consensus, as it's only a small number of people out of thousands. Because of that, content or personal disputes should go through the correct process, so that anyone has the opportunity to find them and contribute their point of view. Us responding with the equivalent of "Don't feed the trolls" would be no more than a kangaroo court, with us being judge, jury and executioner.

"I've added an entry at Articles for Comment, so that we can get further input from other Wikipedians as to the merits of the homosexuality rumours. It seems the most appropriate and non-confrontational step." KeithD (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Revert gangs

Just a note, roping people in to exceed the 3RR is not a good idea. Rich Farmbrough 12:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Just for your information

Sorry, Wet Dilkes alias IP 129.241.134.241, I am not banned from editing any article by the Wikipedian Supreme Court as you falsely claimed in one of your edit summaries. Would you please refrain from reverting my contributions to the Elvis Presley article. Onefortyone 01:11, 18 December 2005 (UTC)