User talk:196.207.32.37
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Note: this IP is registered to Vodacom, but it is not clear whether it is shared. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nlu (talk • contribs) 14:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC) why have i been banned for vandalism ?
- This IP is registered to Vodacom and is, I'm sure, shared (as is obvious by the diverse and dubious nature of the multitude of entries below). I believe it is allocated to any Vodacom subscriber in South Africa or Africa using a modem with a Vodacom SIM to connect to the internet. Am I to understand then that I'll never be able to edit a Wikipedia page while using my modem? Can an exception not be made in this case?
Contents |
[edit] August 2007
Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Elizabethan era. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. VegitaU 16:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.
Your recent edit to Decagon (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. For future editing tests use the sandbox. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 12:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Addition of material to talk pages, apparently written by others, is either forgery (if incorrect) or a GFDL violaition (if correct), unless sourced. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jonathan Wells (intelligent design advocate). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Don't duplicate people's comments without making it clear they are a quote. I've blocked you for 1 day for doing that in this edit. JesseW, the juggling janitor 19:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
"What others do is not relevant for your' block." What is that suppose to mean? The basis of the block is forgery which is shown to not be based on facts. It IS therefor very relevant and the block is not based on facts. 196.207.32.37 21:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- Reviewing the details further, I see that both you and Mr. Rubin are wrong. You, I presume, copied the material you did because it was part of a section that was marked as "please don't modify this". You copied it without making it clear that it was quoted -- this was a mistake; however, it was an entirely honest and reasonable one. In the same edit, you added your reply to the comments you copied. Arthur Rubin reverted your whole edit, citing the correct point that copying people's comments without making it clear you are quoting them is not acceptable. However, it was wrong of him to revert your comments, which, AFAIK, were not problematic, if a bit hostile (which may be justified). Following this, you both engaged in a revert war, without either of you explaining further, or modifying your edits to try and reach a compromise. This was wrong on both your sides. As your original mistake was honest, and both of you engaged in the foolish revert war, and considering that, according to an email sent to me this IP addresss is shared, I'm unblocking. I appologize for not fully realizing the situation before making the block -- however, both you and Mr. Rubin hold some blame for this, as neither of you bothered to try and compromise or understand what was going on, either. JesseW, the juggling janitor 02:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise if my edits were misinterpreted. I did not realise that it was necessary to mark the text as quoted as it was in the same section and don't even know how to do a quote. I continued reverting largely because I was accused of forgery when this is not the case and object mostly to that accusation which caused me to consider the reverts as a disingenuous attempt to stop the conversation. I also apologise to you if I seemed somewhat hostile in my comments but do want to add that this is largely the tone that is taken towards me in articles like this which is why I am not using a username but I try not to let it interfere with my attitude towards other editers. Peace 196.207.32.37 00:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I would like to apologize, also. It had assumed that "you" were familiar with the GFDL requirements that quotes from elsewhere in Wikipedia be properly marked as quotes. With my general (amateur) familiarity and study of copyright law for over 15 years, I was familiar with the requirements for quoting others, and I assumed that anyone who posted here as much as you would be familiar with the GFDL requirements. Perhaps we can return to discussing the article content in a civilized manner? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise if my edits were misinterpreted. I did not realise that it was necessary to mark the text as quoted as it was in the same section and don't even know how to do a quote. I continued reverting largely because I was accused of forgery when this is not the case and object mostly to that accusation which caused me to consider the reverts as a disingenuous attempt to stop the conversation. I also apologise to you if I seemed somewhat hostile in my comments but do want to add that this is largely the tone that is taken towards me in articles like this which is why I am not using a username but I try not to let it interfere with my attitude towards other editers. Peace 196.207.32.37 00:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Please read our WP:POINT guideline and do not troll talk pages. FeloniousMonk 06:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] September 2007
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Industrial design, you will be blocked from editing. Stephen Burnett 14:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edit to Artificial neural network (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. You have been identified as a new user or a logged out editor using a hosting or shared IP address to add email addresses, phone numbers, YouTube, Geocities, Myspace, Facebook, blog, forum, or other such free-hosting website links to a non-talk page. Please note that such links are generally to be avoided. You can restore any other content by editing the page and re-adding that content. The links can be reviewed and restored by established users. Thank you for contributing! // VoABot II 13:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed your recent edit to this article (17:41 18 Sep). Your statement that "Branham preached what St. Paul wrote in the Bible" is a personal belief, and cannot be stated that way in an encyclopedia article. You can say what William Branam said/preached/taught, and then link it to a reference where he said that, and also to a Scriptural reference if you like.
I think you are probably a follower of Brother Branham like me, but we only bring reproach on the Word if we do not respect the rules of this site. It is possible to abide by the rules and still present a true and effective witness. Rev107 09:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] October 2007
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.Pedro : Chat 07:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] November 2007
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] December 2007
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Euthyphro, you will be blocked from editing. DavidJ710 talk 22:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 14:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] January 2008
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 Guild Wars (series), 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. —slakr\ talk / 21:33, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to The Walt Disney Company. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. NrDg 21:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added to the page Alaska do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the recent edit you made to Forest has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. · AndonicO Hail! 15:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] February 2008
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to J Dilla, you will be blocked from editing. --Nlu (talk) 14:34, 25 February 2008 (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] March 2008
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Maslow's hierarchy, you will be blocked from editing. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 03:10, 28 March 2008 (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.
 | This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. [WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • Traceroute • Geolocate • Tor check • Rangeblock finder] · [RIRs: America · Europe · Africa · Asia-Pacific · Latin America/Caribbean] |
