User talk:82.18.125.110

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] WIKIPEDIA IS HELL. DON'T BOTHER

Most of this page is devoted to a series of attacks that were made on me as a result of another user 's failure to read the sentence I edited, the edit summary I provided, and ignoring the dictum about assuming good faith that he was quick to throw at me. It is a disfunctional system that is not worth participating in. 82.18.125.110 19:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Babbage

My apologies - I needed to revert some deep vandalism in this article and so unavoidably airbrushed out your recent category changes in the process. Please re-apply your category changes if you wish. If you do, please could you leave the births and deaths categories at the top, as this seems to be usual practice. Thanks, Ian Cairns 22:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

It isn't policy and it obviously makes no sense. 82.18.125.110 22:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Before making potentially controversial edits, such as those you made to Ian Smith, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Otherwise, people might consider your edits to be vandalism. Thank you. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I did not make a controversial edit and I regard your comment as libel and intimidation. You appear to be attempting to mislead anyone else who might see my talk page. Please make a full retraction and apology for the baseless slur. 82.18.125.110 12:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Please see policy regarding legal threats. While I encourage you to pursue and reasonably resolve disputes, please reconsider the particular language you're using. Luna Santin 12:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I have been abused and you are backing him up. Have you no shame? 82.18.125.110 12:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I have plenty. Notice I didn't say you couldn't talk to the guy, I simply discouraged you from issuing legal threats, veiled or otherwise. Luna Santin 12:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I did not make a legal threat. I am not an American. You are just misinterpreting things from the perspective of someone from a litigation happy culture. 82.18.125.110 12:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Please assume good faith while dealing with other editors. We are all here to make an encyclopedia. Try discussing your changes on the talk pages of the article and get the approved by consensus. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I made a totally non-controversial edit. You haven't even tried to justify your attack. I have now invited you to justify your attitude on the article's talk page. This has been an incredibly distressing experience and was totally unnecessary. I really don't see how you can think you are in a position to tell people to assume good faith as you absolutely did not do so yourself. 82.18.125.110 12:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I really don't see how you can think you are in a position to tell people to assume good faith as you absolutely did not do so yourself. You immediately accused me of vandalism. 82.18.125.110 12:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No sir. I never called it outright vandalism. The claims you have made on this page seem controversial to me, and for that I requested you to discuss them on the talk page of the article. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Again you are trying to imply that I made multiple changes. All I did was change "European-dominated" to "Apartheid". It is indisputably accurate and it actually looks worse for Smith. I don't think you have a leg to stand on in your allegations that I have acted improperly on any article. You have caused me much distress for no reason at all. 82.18.125.110 12:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop
Please do not remove legitimate warnings from your talk page or replace them with inappropriate content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. If you continue to remove or vandalize legitimate warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks.  Glen  12:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

If you continue this page will be protected and you may be blocked  Glen  12:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not a "privilege". I don't want to have a user page. I just want to be left alone. All I did was ask to be left alone and I received this horrible upsetting response. The users who have ganged up on me have stopped me making lots of good edits that I would otherwise have made in the same time. 82.18.125.110 12:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why do people gang up on those who try to help Wikipedia?

I made an innocuous edit and look what has happened. No wonder few people are prepared to put up with the stress of editing Wikipedia. 82.18.125.110 12:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Those who tell others to assume good faith should do so themselves

No leeway was given to me. I made an edit that should have been no more controversial than many others I have made and I was immediately accused of vandalism. The threats then piled in and no-one showed me any sympathy or showed the slighest interest in reprimanding the user who abused me. Is there no fairness in Wikipedia? 82.18.125.110 12:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I am vindicated, but no-one else will apologise to me, so I will do so myself

If you visit the Ian Smith talk page you will see that this whole horror was due to a ridiculous misapprehension that I changed the description of the Rhodesian government when I actually changed the description of the South African government. This was down to the users who piled into me reading neither the whole sentence of the sentence I edited nor my edit summary, which included the rather clear phrase "South African government." 82.18.125.110 13:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No one in particular is attacking you. This tiny, petty little debacle is here simply because of things people are used to (the bizarre and unwritten conventions of Wikipedia... ). Articles are vandalised frequently, and it is almost always by an anonymous IP; editors will often revert changes in haste without a thurough inspection of the changes made. I know that your changes were appropriate and I didn't want it to seem as if there was any machinations against you, hence why I added my voice.
If you do want to actively contribute to Wikipedia, I would recommend registering. Doing so will avoid most of the problems that have occurred today. If you do register, I would be glad to assist you in any way possible. michael talk 13:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. If you remove all the unpleasantness from my talk page, including the warning, I will think about it. I would like it returned to where it was yesterday, but if I do that myself I will get a ban or something. Otherwise I will just forget about editing. I am under no obligation to edit, I am doing it as a public service, and it has not been fun. 82.18.125.110 13:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Registering as a Wikipedian will mean a new talk page is created for you and this one will become null. Typically, discussion on talk pages isn't removed unless it is vilification. I know there's a considerable amount of unpleasant discussion here, but it's still not of such a poor standard that it requires deletion (which I cannot do anyway, I am not an administrator).
There's no point telling me about your editing being a public service! Everyone else here is in exactly the same boat and everyone here typically gets no recognition or thanks from the public. If you want to register and contribute, do so, I'll help you; but if you consider your edits a supreme gift to the point that others have to bend over to please you, do not edit. michael talk 13:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Fine. Like most sensible people I will not bother with Wikipedia. I did not ask for thanks I asked for a small courtesy, in response to your own offer to help me. I now fully understand why Wikipedia has such a bad reputation and will avoid it like the plague. 82.18.125.110 19:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apology

I am sorry for the harassment you have endured. I hope you change your mind and decide to continue editing Wikipedia. Please note that the statements made by several other users regarding the need to register are completely untrue. I appreciate your work in tidying the categories. KazakhPol 20:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aishwarya Rai

Sorry about my revertion. I thought I saw something else in VP. My fault Corpx 02:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Francis Turville-Petre

Hi - could I ask why you removed the LGBT rights activist category from his page? Thanks Jasper33 16:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I scanned the article for evidence and only saw the point about attedance at a congress, which hardly justified the category. I missed the other point made. 82.18.125.110 20:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

It would have been nice, having realised your mistake, if you could have bothered to revert it. Jasper33 21:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but you may wish to create an account. It is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, including:

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, make sure to sign and date your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Bushcarrot (Talk·Desk) 00:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)