User talk:213.190.129.19

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hmmm I'm not sure how I managed to remove Geogre's comments, since both my posts came before his. Kappa 16:23, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kappa's OK : was a spurious edit of mine due to cashing discrepancies. Sorry. My appologies. Anon 213.190.129.19 16:31, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Merging

Hi there. Thanks for helping out with the huge amount of speedy deletion candidates- your work is greatly appreciated! I noticed that you tagged Simone de beauvior on the basis that the article already existed at another title. Please note that, for these types of articles, the proper procedure is to put {{merge}} [[destination_article]] on the article that is to be merged, and {{mergefrom}} [[duplicate_article]] on the article that it should be merged to. Duplicate articles are not considered speedy deletion candidates unless they are copied word-for-word. This is because there is often some information that can be salvaged and added into the other article. Thanks for your anticipated cooperation, and welcome to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, you can feel free to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Frazzydee&action=edit&section=new drop me a line] on [[User_talk:Frazzydee|my talk page]]. You also might want to consider [[Special:Userlogin|registering an account]] so you can be identified by a name (or online alias) rather than a number. It will also prevent messages coming here that are not intended for you. It'll also usually allow us to get to know you a bit better! -~~~~

Hi there. OK took note of the {{merge}} - {{mergefrom}}. Thanks for the hint. Deliberately anon. (less fight/pride/waist of time) Anon. 213.190.129.19 09:34, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spamming/vandalism

Please don't edit articles to insert irrelevant external links and misinformation. It is considered vandalism. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:18, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Reply: That sounds like a rather serious allegation sir, and should not be made lightly. Where I come from "vandals" and those who spread "misinformation" are the dregs of society and it is offensive to be numbered among them in such a quick and sweeping judgement.

However I promise I will take greater care in future to not insert anything that might be considered "irrelevent" by those who are not familiar with a subject, without making clear it's exact relevancy. Thanks


I'm not saying don't insert anything that you consider relevant. If you added a note to the talk page explaining the relevance of adding a link to a "cat" site to the Rainier III, Prince of Monaco article, and justifying your claim that Marie Juliette Louvet was "a reknowned cat-lover", it would have been less likely to be described as "irrelevant external links and misinformation". --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:49, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I too must request that you stop spamming your cat site. If this doesn't stop, I will be forced to bring this to an admin. 158.123.160.2 14:31, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop

Look. I am going to be blunt. Just because there's a sandbox for you to play in, it doesn't mean you are allowed to spam your site there. Stop posting your site, or else we're going to need to get an admin involved. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 19:56, Jun 2, 2005 (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. - Ali-oops✍ 13:29, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

This counts for the Mick Foley article. Thanks for expirimenting with wikipedia, your test worked, and has been reverted of removed. Use the Our sandbox to do tests. look at the wp to wikipedia. Thanks Whopper 18:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] April 2006

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Donaghadee. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --Mal 03:43, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] May 2006

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Traveling Wilburys. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Graham talk 08:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] (Republic of) Ireland

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it 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.

Please stop changing articles the use of Republic of Ireland in wikipedia is by consensus, see talk:Republic of Ireland. Djegan 15:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Djegan 15:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Republic of Ireland, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please see Talk:Republic of Ireland for the consensus about this article. --Kwekubo 16:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Read Republic of Ireland Act for the description of the state. In summary official name NOT EQUALS official description. Djegan 16:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 25, 2007

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to the David Beckham page. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Gerrish (talk) 13:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 48 hours as a result of your disruptive edits to David Beckham. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. -- Arwel (talk) 13:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, the recent edit you made to Banned films has been reverted, as it appears to be vandalism. Please do not vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing, or 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 – Qxz 12:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)