User talk:172.165.79.155

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] December 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User:Johnpseudo, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Gscshoyru (talk) 00:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

[edit] Reply

First of all I did not use Twinkle. Second of all you should try reading my reasons for editing: "Proselytising is not a defensible use of Wikipedia resources" and that is what that userbox is doing. That userbox has already been deleted in the past (see Template:User evol-4). 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Also see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/userbox templates concerning beliefs and convictions. 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm using Twinkle; not you. That's what that means. And it's a user page. And the template was restored immediately after. That's the sort of thing you need to take up with the user; if it's not a blatant violation of some policy, discuss with them first. The result of that decision was keep, not delete, besides. Also, what the heck are you doing in all your other edits? Please, stop. It's vandalism. Gscshoyru (talk) 01:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Ummm then why is the template deleted right now? Look:
  • 22:23, 28 October 2007 Jc37 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:User evol-4" ‎ (indef blocked user evading block)
  • 20:10, 8 October 2006 Centrx (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:User evol-4" ‎ (content was: 'Template:Deleteduserbox')
  • 22:38, 10 May 2006 Doc glasgow (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:User evol-4" ‎ (t1)
  • 23:24, 5 March 2006 Guanaco (Talk | contribs) restored "Template:User evol-4" ‎
  • 17:06, 18 February 2006 Physchim62 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:User evol-4" ‎ (content was: '{{db-divisive}}<div style="border:1px solid #222; margin: 1px;float:left;">{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #006400;color:#fff;"...')
  • 11:04, 3 January 2006 Mike Rosoft (Talk | contribs) restored "Template:User evol-4" ‎
  • 09:43, 3 January 2006 Tony Sidaway (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:User evol-4" ‎ (Proselytising is not a defensible use of Wikipedia resources)

It should be deleted. As for a couple of my other edits why would you transclude a userbox with parameters if one without parameters already exists? And why would you keep a barely used template? 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

None of my edits are vandalizm so please stop reverting them? 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
You are now becoming the vandal sir! For instance User:Woohookitty/User is a page meant to categorize all templates. I took off 13 templates that were categorized. Why would you put them back on? 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Template:Soft-drink-stub does not belong in that category so I took it out. Template:Userbox sample compact, all templates must be categorized. 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I was talking about the general decision, of the link you told me. That was keep. As for the rest... barley used is not the same as not used, and you're screwing up templates. Please, stop. And as for the user page, that seems to be maintained by the user, and there's no listing of what it is anywhere. Please don't edit user pages without permission. Gscshoyru (talk) 01:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm ahhh huh that still doesn't explain why the userbox is still deleted does it?
Do you even know the protocol for barely used templates? Do you know what you do with them? You either subst: them or replace them with a better template, and that is what I was doing, the complete opposite of vandalizm. I am not screwing up templates I am fixing them. And user pages have to be edited when they contain malicious content. 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
This looks like vandalizm to me. 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
If it's not blatant, discuss it with them. That's what you're supposed to do.
Additionally, you appear to be a sock of an indef banned user, based on your edits. Which is another reason to revert them.
And that last bit was twinkle screwing up, which if you look at the history, I fixed afterward, before you told me. Gscshoyru (talk) 01:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I had actually told you before you corrected it but there was an edit conflict.
I am merely doing what is right. I am doing what any other Wikipedia user would want me to do. I am cleaning up templates, categorizing them, contributing to the project. Please stop reverting my edits.
172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
this is not clean up. It's a total change. And you seem to have tried this before, by your edits, and were reverted then, as a sock of an indef blocked user, and the same will happen now. Gscshoyru (talk) 01:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
That is how it is supposed to be mate. Those are the same colors as Template:User blank-5, so it only makes sense to change them as other users can misinterpret someone -0 as being -5.
Oh and your comment about "blatant" Wikipedia:WikiProject Userboxes says different. 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Then create a new template. Otherwise the name is confusing. And where in that link is policy that shows that evolution support is a violation? Gscshoyru (talk) 01:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Ummm by create a new template what do you mean? Along with what do you mean when you say the name is confusing?
Oops wrong link... I will edit this with a section link in a second but I said "Proselytising is not a defensible use of Wikipedia resources" for Wikipedia:Userboxes#Content_restrictions. Let me look it up. 172.165.79.155 (talk) 01:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
If you make a template that has to do with language stuff, then make the name have to do with language. Otherwise the name doesn't reflect what the template is.
And, ok. I'll give you the template formatting stuff. You are an indef blocked user, you should not be editing, according to policy in WP:BLOCK somewhere, I believe, and so that may have been a bit of an overreaction. As for the evolution userbox, however, it isn't propaganda or anything. It's simply stating belief. Otherwise the "I am a Christian" userboxes could be removed too. Gscshoyru (talk) 02:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
"If you make a template that has to do with language stuff, then make the name have to do with language. Otherwise the name doesn't reflect what the template is."
...What? That is horrible grammar, and please what should the name be?
Cmon man I gave you a link and everything to Content restrictions, you can't find the right link to WP:BLOCK?
You forget two things about the evolution box:
  1. THE REASONING IS RIGHT THERE. It is the third line in content restrictions.
  2. Is "I am a Christian" deleted? No. Is evol-4 deleted? Yes.
You keep calling me an indef block user... you don't even bother to say the name of the accused? 172.165.79.155 (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to User:Johnpseudo, you will be blocked from editing. Gscshoyru (talk) 02:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.