User talk:Dr Spam (MD)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello Dr Spam (MD), and welcome to Wikipedia! 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 being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Neo-Jay 22:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hallo

You should leave you answer to Point-to-Point merge on the Steeplechase (horse racing). (Discuss) - Le gach dea-mhéin Culnacreann

[edit] May 2008

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Super Smash Bros. Melee, without explaining the valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Ashnard Talk Contribs 06:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Talk:Super Smash Bros. Melee. Please discontinue using talk pages for inappropriate discussion. Talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views; they are for discussion related to improving the article, and are not to be used as a forum or chat room. Your comments are not constructive, unfounded and potentially libellous. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. haz (talk) 08:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Smash Bros.

Stop intimating that the Smash Bros article is an advertisement for Nintendo or was written by Nintendo employees. Unless you have airtight evidence that supports your outlandish claims, the next time you edit Talk:Super Smash Bros. Melee, you may be blocked for disruption.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

i didn't "intimate" it (you've used the wrong word dear) i simply stated what seemed to me to be an obvious fact; why would nintendo not contribute to an article on one of their games in this forum? of course large corporations monitor articles that concern them on wikipedia, just as they monitor press comment in mainstream publications - why is that controversial? wikipedia allows them to edit the articles so inevitably they do so; why do you say that that is an outlandish claim?

what's your evidence that the article is free of any nintendo input? that would be kind of odd would it not? have you never worked for a large commercial organisation?

seriously what do you think happens in the nintendo offices when one of their game is FA of the day?

Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 10:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The same that happens to Studebaker when one of its products hits FA. -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 16:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Whatever your issue with the article is, please stop disrupting the talk page. Talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article, not a general forum. Any further nonconstructive edits and you will be reported and probably blocked. Jefffire (talk) 10:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Despite the discussion (and warning) above, you made an additional disruptive edit to Talk:Super Smash Bros. Melee here, which was reverted as unhelpful trolling. You have been cautioned against disrupting this page, and you continued to do so. As a result,

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Disruptive Editing at Talk:Super Smash Bros. Melee. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

In the future, please do not disrupt the talk pages. Thank you. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Your Username et al

As I recall, there was some discussion at WP:ANI regarding your username (as the comment on my talk page that you replied to would indicate), but no action was taken or even seen to be warranted - so, not a big deal. However, I noticed your offer to help businesses benefit from exposure on Wikipedia, and am forced to remind you about Wikipedia's policies on advertising. Simply put, if you create or help to create an article that just serves as promotion or advertisement for an organization, the article will be deleted. If the article meets our policies on neutrality and Verifiability, then good on you - but non-neutral, promotional articles will likely be deleted rapidly. Best to you, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

This your edit and others, such as this and this one makes it clear that you have no intention to edit Wikipedia constructively, abiding by our principles. As such, you are blocked indefinitely. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 09:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

oh dear! Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 12:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "what a heap of crap; I raised legitimate issues concerning the way in which wiki-pedia is being used for advertising purposes; these concerns are shared by a wide number of wiki-editors (who have not been blocked); but even if they are not they are entirely reasonable concerns that I am entitled to bring up; in each instance i raised the issues on discussion pages or on my own talk page; it is my firm belief that if wikipedia does not address these concerns its reputation will suffer quickly; blocking a user who raises these concerns on a talk page is just silly. The last edit complained of was that i scrubbed some childish nonsense about a japanese tv programme; actually it wasn't event an article about a tv programme: it was about episodes in a tv programme; the reason i was looking at it was because its chief contributor had scrubbed an article that i had contributed to. I don't understand what aspect of wikipedia policy indicates that a long list of episodes of a tv programme is of more enclycopedic interest than a article about Robert Crampton's column in the times. I guess you just want wikipedia to concentrate on popular media stuff. Anyway if you unblock me i promise that i will be good! Thanks"

Decline reason: "The message on your talk page says it all--you intend to use Wikipedia solely for advertising.— Blueboy96 18:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 16:55, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "the last person to look at my request did not read it correctly; the message on my talk page invited people to contact me if they wanted to use wiki-pedia for advertising: that was because I was frustrated with the failure to meet my concerns about advertising, not because i want to use wikipedia for advertising (it was like ironic?); please read the posts properly. thanks"

Decline reason: "That's not a request. Please note that you can't unblock yourself. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 11:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.


Administrator use only: If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following as notification.

why is that not a request?

have another look please

I did. It looks like an argument against the last person to look and an appeal to a previously-declined request; that is not an unblock request. Sorry; I agree with the declines (both of them). -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 04:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

hahaha; well your loss darlings! Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 07:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


the evening of wiki-pedia existence ..... hmmmmmm - how i enjoy wondering through the shadowy corridors of my confinement, waiting for the bitter end - in a way release from captivity; in another way oblivion

what can i do to tease out a little bit more wiki-existence?

how can i ensure that my ghost continues to make its presence known on these blue remembered hills? Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 17:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ghosts are exorcised or honored, depending on their original's behavior. You're looking at exorcism here. -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 17:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
ha ha; well i'm sorry to learn that your life outside wikipedia is so limited that you are still reading this talk page; although I confess that that does give me an idea for my revenge Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 07:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
No, I have your talk page watchlisted, boyo. I'm actually just about to play Metal Slug, followed up with a few cards on MSE2, and finally bamf on over to Diablo 2. And if you start socking, the checkusers will catch you - I'll see to it you're brought to their attention. -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 07:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
nice one! oh my god i wish that i had a lifestyle like yours - Metal Slug - that sounds totally ace; i don't know what these other things are, but i confess that you totally contradict the stereotype of the wikipedia administrator, ie male, a little bit nerdy, interested in computer games, not much life away from the PC, zero sex life, few friends other than met on the internet; you totally rock!
by the way: please clarify the socking thing - how does it work? catch me what? what can i do and what can't i do? Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 09:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, Wikipedia admins are like Anonymous - anyone and everyone. We have structural engineers, children, and even authors as admins.
P.S. Checkusers check the underlying address beneath each account to determine sockpuppetry. -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 17:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
P.S. Your sock was blocked on behavior. Have a nice day! -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 18:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
This userpage will be deleted after a reasonable period of time.

Some of the administrators are children - you don't say! What you mean still at school and stuff? Cool! no wonder wikipedia gives such great coverage to the Simpsons!

I'm now going to spend 5 mins reviewing administrators to establish their broad profile; i'm guessing it's generally going to be: - boys - tend towards sciency or techy - generally still in college or doing some nerdy job - interested in computer games (pretty much without exception) - not massively good at people skills - user pages which are a little bit geeky if not whacky

when i have got time i'm going to look at say 5 administrators and i reckon it will be: - all 5 boys - all or at least 4 sciency or techy - all or at least 3 in college - all 5 interested in computer games - people skills is too subjective but each one will have some evidence of people skill failure - user pages also too subjective

let me know if you accept the challenge Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 07:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

PS: re sock puppetry - if for example i were to use a different computer would that enable me to start again with another account? Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 07:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't need checkuser to tag your sock - your behavior, frankly, gave yourself away. And, given as I'm an Aspie and know a few things about failure in people skills, it takes people skills to be an administrator on the English Wikipedia. If you're a complete ass or have no clue about people skills, you're going to find yourself desysopped faster than you can say "Willie on Wheels."
And from what I can see, I see several female administrators available (one of which is a checkuser I turn to in sockpuppetry cases requiring it), many administrators in salaried jobs (though there are a fair amount of college students here), few video game enthusiasts, and (outside the developers and bot-builders) somewhat technologically-inept. In other words, the opposite of what you suggest. -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 07:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

OK - i take it that if i use a different computer i can start another account; see how long it takes you to find it ! Dr Spam (MD) (talk) 09:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I am going to wager that it'll take five seconds - your own editing style betrays you. -Jéské (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 02:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)