User talk:82.38.18.89

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Attention:

This IP address, 82.38.18.89, is registered to BROADBANDAUDIT, and may be shared by multiple users. If the organization uses proxy servers or firewalls, 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 and a block may be shared by many. 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; if so, please see here.

If you are autoblocked repeatedly, we encourage you to contact your Internet service provider or IT department and ask them to contact Wikimedia's XFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on their proxy servers so that our editing blocks will affect only the intended user. Alternatively, you can list the IP at Wikipedia:WikiProject on XFFs.

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 with the template {{anonblock|optional comment}} as the block reason.

Note: In the event of vandalism from this address, abuse reports may be sent to your network administrator for further investigation.
IT staff who want to monitor vandalism from this IP address can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia from SqueakBox! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here is a list of useful links that I have compiled:

Again, welcome. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kevin Phillips

Please ensure that if you add an entry to a Wikipedia disambiguation page, as you did with Kevin Phillips, that the person meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. That the subject runs a website does not in itself make them notable enough for inclusion. --Jameboy (talk) 00:28, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 09:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of humanists

Hello. Thanks for adding Ronnie Barker to the list. Don't forget to add a closing tag after references (</ref>). Failure to do so can make subsequent text "disappear," or appear improperly in the References section at the end of the article (Like [see the end of the article). A basic reference should look something like this in the edit box: <ref>Title, author, ''Publication name'', date of publication</ref>. Again, thanks for adding to the List of humanists. I look forward to more contributions. Nick Graves (talk) 15:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neil Kinnock

"According to the Greater Manchester Humanists Group meeting notes (June 11, 1997), Kinnock is an agnostic". This is the source used at the top of the article, where it is claimed that Kinnock is a "humanist (agnostic)". If you find a source to dispute that, please raise it on the talk page for the article. Thanks, LaFoiblesse (talk) 12:47 8 April 2008 (GMT)

Edit: I see that you did provide a source for your subsequent (reverted) edits to the Kinnock article. I have not read the biography you sourced but I would caution you against assuming that the religious beliefs purportedly held by Kinnock in 1994 are the same as those held by him now. The source cited by the article is for 1997, and I actually have access to it, which is a bonus. I'd also suggest that were he a true atheist he might not, in 1983 admittedly, have said "someone up there likes me" after avoiding death in a car crash.(talk) 13:59 4 May 2008 (GMT)

[edit] Your Contributions

First of all, welcome to Wikipedia (although a quick glance at your contributions shows me you need no welcome). I have reverted nearly all that I could of your edits, as they seem to be (though minute) not helpful/constructive. Should you feel that I've made an error, please respond on my talk page. I should also point out that my revisions have removed all versions you have put on the page, so the pages where you've edited over 50 times (see Jane Bunford) and the ones where you have edited 3 times have all been reverted. Again, should you feel that I've made a revision in error, please let me know on my talk page. Good day. phoenixMourning ( talk/contribs ) 12:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Because you continue to turn this into an edit war, I have requested the assistance of some administrators. phoenixMourning ( talk/contribs ) 00:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Response

I'm not saying your information is not factual, at all. By all means, if there's refutable evidence that your edits were, in fact, helpful, then I am in the wrong. But referencing some things here, such as "Jane Bunford's birth certificate." Now, because I do not know you personally and (unfortunately) because you are editing behind an anonymous IP address, your edits are challenged. Please have a look at WP:NPOV, and I urge you to take it's contents in. And in regards to your statement, where you said that incorrect information has been added to Wikipedia, over two years ago. That is not my place. As I'm sure you know, no one can be every place at every single time. That's one of the downsides with user-edited websites; some information is bound to seep through the cracks. That's not the case here. The tag at the top of the page specifically states: "Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Unsourced material + non-neutral point of view is not a good combination. In closing, my friend, I urge you to do the following:

  • Create an account with Wikipedia (by doing this, you will automatically seem more "credible," so to speak)
  • Take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia

Thanks for your time and good luck with the future. phoenixMourning ( talk/contribs ) 16:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You have been blocked from editing

It has become clear that a number of your contributions are non-constructive, and are causing disruption to the articles to which they affect. On the basis of edits such as [1], [2] and [3], as well as the disruptive nature of a number of your edits, I have blocked your account for 24 hours.

When your block expires, I'm going to strongly encourage you to create an account, and get in touch with me. You've clearly got an ability to edit; you simply have the wrong idea about what is welcome in an article. Just to point you to a number of key policies: content in articles has to be verifiable (i.e., shown to be true), the subject has to be notable (as established through third-party reliable sources), and the article has to be written from a neutral point of view–that is, not written from any particular bias, and not giving undue weight to any particular point of view.

Please do not disrupt articles further, and do consider creating an account to "start a-fresh". Trust me, you can become a great article writer; you simply need a little bit of coaching. I'm willing to help you, but at the same time, I can't stand by and watch disruption. Kind regards, Anthøny 11:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Last Warning

This is your last warning. If you keep reverting page edits that I have done (which require GOOD, RELIABLE SOURCES-- and NOT something like "her general practitioner) you will be referred to another administrator again for assistance. You've been warned. phøenixMøurning ( talk/contribs ) 19:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Jane Bunford do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.

The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: 'groups\.yahoo\.com' (link(s): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/growthspurts2/) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 08:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

[edit] May 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Eric Morecambe 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. Fattyjwoods (Push my button) 07:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Jeff Rooker, Baron Rooker. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. JForget 14:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
I still see same of the same disruption coming from this IP such as modifying date info and some unsourced content. Anymore of this will result in a another block. Since it is a share edit, there are also good contributions as well.JForget 14:37, 24 May 2008 (UTC)