User talk:65.184.17.216

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

Currently, you are editing without a username. You can continue to do so as you are not required to log in to Wikipedia to read and write articles, however, logging in will result in a username being shown instead of your IP address (yours is 65.184.17.216). Logging in does not require any personal details. There are many other benefits for logging in to Wikipedia. For now, if you are stuck, you can type {{helpme}} on this page and an experienced Wikipedian will be around to answer any questions you may have.

Please note these points:

  • Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
  • Please use a neutral point of view to edit the article; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
  • If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do that.
  • Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted texts, advertisement messages, and texts that are not related to that article. Both adding such unreasonable information and editing articles maliciously are considered vandalism. A user who repeatedly vandalises articles will be blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, ask me on [[User_talk:{{{1}}}|my Talk page]] – I will answer your questions as far as I can! Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia.

from Wikipedian: Justin Eiler 04:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Regarding your edits to Wicca

Greetings,

The link that you removed is an important view of Wicca within the Christian community--and while it's a "minority view," it is one that I wish more Christians would emulate. As such, the link is directed to Christians about Wiccans: it is not intended to "convert" Wiccans.

If you have doubts about an article or link, it can help to discuss changes on the talk page before making a change. Yeah, that's kind of a contradiction of Wikipedia:Be bold, but it can also help to make sure that changes are something that everyone can agree with. Justin Eiler 04:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PROD tag on USSA

You put a PROD tag on USSA which I firmly disagree with. USSA is a valid disambiguation page. Feel free to take this to WP:AfD if you wish. DarthVader 03:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it is not appropriate to Prod a disambiguation page. Gwernol 03:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but if you believe th articles themselves should be deleted, please nominate the articles, not the disambiguation page. At most that would be nominated after the articles have been deleted by consensus. Also, please read the prod rules which clearly state:

"Contested deletions: If anyone, including the article's creator, removes Template:Prod from an article for any reason, do not put it back. If you still believe the article needs to be deleted, list it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion."

If you want to continue with this proposed deletion, please take this to the AfD process, but do not re-apply the Prod tag. Thanks, Gwernol 03:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

In response to this: [1], the policy page for PROD says: "If you do not agree that the article should be deleted without discussion: Remove the {{dated prod}} tag from the article, and optionally try to address the concerns of the tagging editor". I removed the {{dated prod}} tag from the page in accordance with the policy. I am happy to discuss why this disambiguation page should not be deleted if necessary. DarthVader 03:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Um, you added the talk page after the edit summary that claimed I should have read the talk page. I may be good but I'm afraid time travel is not among my talents. By the way I've left a comment on the talk page. Gwernol 03:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note on Cumberland County, Pennsylvania

I reverted the link change from http://www.ccna.net to http://www.gocarlisle.com — the latter goes to a generic template site that is not in fact related to Cumberland County. The former still seems to be the correct current website. —PaperTruths 23:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, okay.  :) Maybe the thing to do would be to wait until the site goes live before changing the link? I'm not sure. It's a judgment call, in any case, so either way you want to play it is probably fine. (Though I can't say for sure, not being a particularly experienced Wikipedian.) Thanks for getting back to me! —PaperTruths 23:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry...

...but even if you are an admin that isn't logged in, it's against policy to block someone you're in a dispute with. Regards. —Khoikhoi 00:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

And btw, you know what the three-revert rule is, right? —Khoikhoi 00:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

3 revert rule does not count per Jimbo if it is to fix vandalism.

Yes, but it's only for obvious vandalism, like blanking an entire page. This is a content dispute. —Khoikhoi 00:58, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stephanie Adams

Your recent comments on Talk:Stephanie Adams are unacceptable per the WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL policies. If you cannot express your concerns in a civilized manner you will likely be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you, Gwernol 00:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you may be blocked for disruption. Gwernol 00:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Even if you make a good point, it is important to be civil. — ßottesiηi (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Wikipedia by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. TigerShark 00:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why hasn't this user been permanently banned?

User 65.184.17.216 is a repeated nuisance and threat to the integrity if Wikipedia. User shows no knowledge let alone respect for the rules of Wikipedia. User has threatened to ban ADMINS and has claimed to be an admin himself. According to previous discussions, user posed as actress JuliannaRoseMauriello (user name now banned). One can only imagine what other damages this user has done under other names. Previous Comment Unsigned by Cumberbund

User Cumberbund has 3 edits to Wikipedia, all for this page, IP address resolves to Gwernol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.184.17.216 (talk • contribs)

How do you know that this Cumberbund has the same IP address as Gwernol? I doubt that you have checkuser. DarthVader 00:18, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I doubt that user Cumberbund has the same IP address as I do, my home IP is a statically assigned by my ISP. I sometimes edit from my work IP which is shared, but its unlikely that Cumberbund would be from my company. I'd have no objection to a CheckUser being run to confirm this, if others feel it is useful. As Darthvader says though, its also unlikely that 65.184.17.216 has the ability to run CheckUser. Gwernol 01:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can see that I have never been banned and user 65.184.17.216 is not an admin. 18:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help

I just got onto the site and it wont let me do anything, how do I make stuff for the encyclopedia, people are talking to me but it's not me, what do I do?

Hi, please do not remove previous warnings from this talk page. As you can see from the restored warnings above, this IP address has been used for serious vandalism of Wikipedia in the recent past. It is currently blocked from editing Wikipedia although you can still read all the articles. If you can find the person with whom you share this IP address and convince them to stop vandalising here it may be possible to get this IP address unblocked. Best Gwernol 21:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

==Do Not Remove Warnings== Please do not remove warnings from your talk page or replace them with offensive content. Removing warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. If you continue to remove warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Threats

Don't threaten other users as you did here [2]. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

When you are making threats against other users it's everybodys responsibility to "butt in". And frankly I really don't think that you are working with Jimbo. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Then have Jimbo come to my page and tell me himself otherwise it's just your idle threats. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Assuming good faith don't mean sitting back and letting you make threats aginst good users. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm not the one claiming to be Jimbo's buddy. Till Tusday. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:18, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

I've removed this IP's editing priveleges for the time being, as it is being used to make strange threats to Wikipedia editors. Jkelly 20:28, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh really? Um... It seems you haven't, nor can you, please quit screwing around and making decisions that clearly are NOT yours to make. Thanks.65.184.17.216 08:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked IPs/users can always edit their own Talk pages. Usually they use them to attempt to convince the blocking admin to unblock, but almost as often, as in the above, they use them to confirm the reason for blocking. Jkelly 19:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hmmm

Kind of Strange that a few users only signed up for Wikipedia to change the posts this ip address has made.

I even included verifiable refernces as seen here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jessica_Lunsford&action=history


The user Cumberbud actually made an account just to argue the facts with me. How can you argue with CNN references. I have no idea.

I'm REALLY wondering if the user Cumberbund is actually another user's sockpuppet named Birdflu2006, who also signed up to Wikipedia to only vandalise (Look at all his contributions) pages I correctly edited with verifiable notable proof.


Strange isn't it.


[edit] STrange?

Maybe Gwernol and me and the other admins who have banned you are all the same person and sockpuppet! Please... --Cumberbund 17:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)