User talk:198.207.168.65

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Attention:

This IP address, 198.207.168.65, is registered to Martinez Outpatient Clinic and Center for Rehabilitation & Extended Care, 150 Muir Rd, Martinez, California and may be shared by multiple users. In the case of organizations using proxy servers, this IP address may in fact represent many users at many physical computers.

For this reason a message intended for one person may be received by another. If you are editing from this address and are frustrated by irrelevant messages, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself. (In some cases you may temporarily be unable to create an account due to efforts to fight vandalism in which case we invite you to try again at a later time or from a different computer.)

In the event of vandalism from this address, efforts will be made to contact Martinez Outpatient Clinic and Center for Rehabilitation & Extended Care to report network abuse.

Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking - if a block is needed, administrators should consider using a soft block.

Contents

[edit] WP:RS

Dear anon. I can see that you feel strongly about defending Griffin, but he's just not a credible source according to WP:RS standards. Hope you will consider your casual revert. Morton devonshire 18:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

It's not about 'defending Griffin,' it's about covering all the points of the story. 198.207.168.65 21:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Of course, that's appropriate. Griffin, however, is not a reliable source, according to WP:RS standards, to cite as a source to cover these other points. Morton devonshire 11:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks 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. Thanks. --Rory096 23:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you Griffin? Morton devonshire 00:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

That sounds like a conspiracy theory if you ask me. 198.207.168.65 00:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You're Skeena, aren't you?  : ) Morton devonshire 00:57, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

More conspiracy theory! This reminds me of the hardcore conservatives who trash gays all their career and then are found out to be gay themselves, or to have gay kids -- it's a defense mechanism against something that is a part of them which they cannot accept, and so spend a great deal of time rejecting.

Actually all of us CTists are in reality one internet persona living outside the US . . . . 198.207.168.65 21:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

. . . in multiple sockpuppets.  : D SkeenaR 22:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

AHA! I'VE GOT YOU NOW! Morton devonshire 00:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

And from here on an island in the South Pacific I can cause no end of frustration and puffing for bastions of truth like the WSJ, the WashPost, and the good guvmint-luvin behaviors of the participants of wikipedia, scouring for my screeds and debunking my numerous personnas and their hokey 'research.' 198.207.168.65 01:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Morton, This is great! (p.s.-get a check done-I don't mean a psych evaluation, just a sockpuppet check)SkeenaR 01:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Hope you're lovin the sunshine, and your Wiki-fun with an anon IP address. I was out of town at my publisher's office last week, and had my own bit of fun. Also, the caption change is great. Cheers. Morton devonshire 02:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Huh? SkeenaR 03:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you mean the caption change under the tin foil hat . . . 198.207.168.65 19:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

. . . yeah, it's priceless hey? SkeenaR 01:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Please stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.--digital_me(Talk)(Contribs) 21:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what information you're talking about so you'll have to be specific. 198.207.168.65 21:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted a recent edit you made to the article Loose Change (video). You did not provide an edit summary, and I could not determine whether the edit was vandalism or a constructive contribution. In the future, please use edit summaries. 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. Xyrael T 19:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Judicial Watch

Please stop adding irrelevant passages to the Loose Change section on the Pentagon Crash. If you wish to discuss the integrity and credibility of Judicial Watch, they have their own article.--Rosicrucian 23:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ok

One, I didn't label it vandalism, that's the name of the program. Two, it messed everything up on the page. Feel free to comment. Yanksox 23:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to jump to conclusions -- I feel really abused on here a lot of the time because I defend the right to question the official story and the questions themselves. One of the most infuriating exchanges I've had involved the fact that even if I have citations from a scientist currently employed at a major university heading a science department and doing lab work to back up an opinion, that 'doesn't count' because 'lab work is different than field work.' It's ridiculous! And that written by someone in the military and defending the official story, mocking all questioning. 198.207.168.65 19:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Please, please, stop moving paragraphs that contain no explicit criticism into the criticism section of the article. If you look at that section you will see that it is reserved for pointed, attributed criticism. Because something reflects badly upon someone does not make it "criticism"! If you disagree, discuss on the talk page. Levi P. 19:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to 9/11 Truth Movement, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. Peephole 23:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to 9/11 Truth Movement. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. 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. Sagaciousuk (talk) 23:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to 9/11_conspiracy_theories, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. Peephole 18:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding edits made during October 18, 2006 to 911: In Plane Site

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits. Glen 23:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe that you're absolutely correct. George Bush has actually planned 9/11 the whole time. In fact, Republicans did this. George Bush is just the guy that actually did this. This is truth. And L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology is the true religion. And all Democrats are angels. I support liberalism. Hitler's alive. I'm God. I am not crazy, I'm perfectly sane! Has my point made it across yet? --66.218.14.171 00:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to remove content from pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — CharlotteWebb 14:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)