User talk:71.37.52.43
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] March 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Talk:Photosensitive epilepsy 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. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 06:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- What? Why?71.37.52.43 (talk) 06:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- How exactly is this history being made? Black Hat hackers do things like this all the time. How about you explain why exactly it should be included in the article.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 07:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- No they dont
- Yes, they do. They hack with malicious intent, intent to cause harm through acts of terrorism, that is what black hat hacking is. Do some research.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 07:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Never physical harm. Since you're directly contradicting the news sources on this point, I think the research burden lies with you.71.212.36.152 (talk) 01:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- It actually doesn't really matter. If you want the info in the article, discuss why it should be put in on the article talk page. People don't want it there for some reason. I have nothing more to really do here.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 06:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Nobody objected to the content. One admin banned the user for unrelated vandalism, and goes and mass-reverts every edit the user made. Then editor after editor auto-reverts without even reading the content, just ASSuming it shouldn't be there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.37.49.114 (talk) 08:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I suggest we both go over to the article talk space and gather support for the inclusion of this data. It is quite relevant to the article, and if we gain enough support for its inclusion, we shouldn't have any problems. As soon as you start the thread. I also suggest you get yourself a username.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 10:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Nobody objected to the content. One admin banned the user for unrelated vandalism, and goes and mass-reverts every edit the user made. Then editor after editor auto-reverts without even reading the content, just ASSuming it shouldn't be there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.37.49.114 (talk) 08:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- It actually doesn't really matter. If you want the info in the article, discuss why it should be put in on the article talk page. People don't want it there for some reason. I have nothing more to really do here.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 06:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Never physical harm. Since you're directly contradicting the news sources on this point, I think the research burden lies with you.71.212.36.152 (talk) 01:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, they do. They hack with malicious intent, intent to cause harm through acts of terrorism, that is what black hat hacking is. Do some research.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 07:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- No they dont
- How exactly is this history being made? Black Hat hackers do things like this all the time. How about you explain why exactly it should be included in the article.— Dædαlus→quick link / Improve 07:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 | 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] |
