User talk:192.197.82.153

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of Ceraurus.
Please refer to RFCU for evidence. See block log.

Contents

[edit] No Honorifics please

According to the Wikipedia style manual we should not be using honorifics such as The Honourable at the beginning of entries. Please see the section of the style book on honorifics. Thanks. Homey 19:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Honorific prefixes

The inclusion of some honorific prefixes and styles has proved controversial on Wikipedia. Wikipedia currently distinguishes between three groups: nobles, government officials, and members of royal families and popes.
  • (1) Styles and honorifics which are derived from noble title, including The Most Noble, The Most Honourable, The Right Honourable, and The Honourable, shall not be included in the text inline but may be legitimately discussed in the article proper.
  • (2) Styles and honorifics which are derived from political activities, including but not limited to The Right Honourable for being a Member of the Privy Council, shall not be included in the text inline but may be legitimately discussed in the article proper.
  • (3) Styles shall not be used to open articles on royalty and popes. Thus the article on Pope Benedict XVI shall not begin "His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI . . . " nor the article on Queen Victoria begin "Her Majesty Queen Victoria . . ." They should, however, be discussed in the article proper.
  • (4) The honorific Sir shall be included in the text inline for baronets, knights bachelor, and members of knightly orders whose rank grants them that dignity, provided that they do not hold a higher dignity, such as a peerage, which trumps that usage.

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) for their use in article titles.

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! --Rory096 16:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Federal Courts

What do the federal courts use the SCC building for, do you know? I know that the actual court rooms for both federal court are housed in the same building as the offices. --PullUpYourSocks 03:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ban

You've been banned for 24 hours for vandalizing Rachel Marsden by blanking much of the content. Homey 15:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] April 5 deletion

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Rachel Marsden. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Bucketsofg 21:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Sceptre (Talk) 14:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] May 19

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Joe Jklin 17:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to remove content from pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Bucketsofg✐ 17:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

It looks like you've been kindly warned about Rachel Marsden before. So I'll let the admins know what you're doing again. KC9CQJ 17:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  — TheKMantalk 17:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  — TheKMantalk 17:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Blocked
You have been blocked for vandalism for 31 hours. To contest this block, add the text {{unblock}} on this page, along with an explanation of why you believe this block to be unjustified. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username (if you have one) and IP address in your email.

Please do not erase warnings on this page. Doing so is also considered vandalism.

--Kungfu Adam (talk) 17:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Jonathan Denis

Your recent edit to Jonathan Denis (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot4 18:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rideau Centre

The reason I changed your edit was because the link wasn't pointing to a page with information. I now see that there's a problem surrounding the website and its use of ASP that sometimes results in being directed to the right page, and sometimes not. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 21:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to Cupar, Saskatchewan, you will be blocked from editing. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TellyaddictEditor review! 19:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 21:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser, you will be blocked from editing. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Oliver202 (talk) 21:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Sea Otter, you will be blocked from editing. Victoriagirl (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Spellcast (talk) 20:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)