User talk:Meleniumshane90
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
========. High level of vandalism. Meleniumshane90 17:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Meleniumshane90
Meleniumshane90 is a misspelling of millennium.
In Soviet Korea, cat eats YOU!
[edit] Violation of Wikipedia Terms
Note: Anyone who modifies the format of this page will be subject to Wikipedia's Spam Policy. This page is now under the watch of Wikipedia.
Also, a note to Mhking, you have been officially reported to Wikipedia. An Wikipedia:edit war is not the appropriate way to conduct yourself on Wikipedia.
May I also direct everyone to reading the Three-Revert Rule, which allows you to be banned for a minimum of 24-hours for reverting more than three times in the form of vandalism.
- The removal of warning templates in order to avoid conversation and detection of past offenses can be construed as vandalism and a violation of Wikipedia terms. My reversions of the warnings on your page are within the guidelines of Wikipedia rules. Conversely, your continued placement of outside links on Celebration, Florida and your false accusations of spam on my part are also against the rules governing conduct of posters on Wikipedia. Your actions have been reported to Wikipedia administrators. An administrator has asked you to make use of the dispute resolution process. I am more than willing to do so. However, your continued use of threats and intimidation will not be tolerated. Any continued threats will be reported and governed accordingly. Finally, I ask once again, that you please cease from adding outside links to Celebration, Florida in violation of Wikipedia's policy governing outside links. Thank you. --Mhking (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
All of this information has already been submitted and will be reviewed by Wikipedia. You have absolutely no right to place your own judgment on Celebration, Florida's page on the basis that you do not like church-community relations. While, in fact, a Civic Corridor is in construction for the town by Celebrate Church's 600+ member basis, the Celebration Academy (a private school that has to meet in a large condo), as well as a multitude of the people in the town of Celebration. In fact, if you look at the church-attending population in celebration, you will be astonished to find it to be at least one-third of the population. I find your comments to be both unwarranted and defiling to my character. The very idea that me placing links to organizations in town is unfit on Wikipedia is not up to your determination, and in fact is fully warranted by Wikipedia, may I direct you to the link you sent me; "Wikipedia articles may include links to Web pages outside Wikipedia. Such pages could contain further research that is accurate and on-topic.."]. Read the following carefully;
"Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any."
Now I am willing to come to a compromise on the links if they are completely disallowed, which the administrator I spoke with recommends, "What Should Be Linked".
Meleniumshane90 05:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
{{unblock reviewed|1=I have sent a complete message to user:nlu explaining in great detail why my account should not be blocked. I have also contacted Wikipedia directly in order to resolve a few user conflicts that have been occurring.
Here is an excerpt of what I sent to user:nlu; I was blocked from Wikipedia access. A user, Mhking, has been harassing me, and posting unwanted things on my page. I have been trying to come to a resolve with him, but he modifies my page each time I revert. He has broken the 3-Revert Rule many times over.
As for the Celebration, Florida incident I have been having with him, may I quote directly from Wikipedia; "Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any.” Please unblock my page, I have done nothing wrong, and have only tried placing warnings on Mhking's discussion page, which he, in turn, deletes. Thank you,
Meleniumshane90
Do not modify the format of this page, I have requested this countless times. It is not at your digression to enforce a format on a user page. Further modifications to the format of this page will result in an immediate contact with Wikipedia officials. This is the final warning, harassment is not tolerated on Wikipedia, and I have already requested for assistance from the service department.
Meleniumshane90 05:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Sinoval 18:29, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unblock
I am one of the admins here and I have come to discuss your block. I have spoken with the administrator who blocked you and we agree that you can be productive. However, your conduct must change. I will unblock you provided you agree to the following:
- All edits at Celebration, Florida must be discussed on the talk page.
- Make no more than one reversion per day at the Celebration, Florida article.
- Read and apply WP:EL.
- Read and apply WP:OWN.
- Stay away from the talk page of the editor you were in conflict with. Stick with the talk page of the article only.
- know that a person can remove warnings from their own talk page.
- You will contact me at the first sign of trouble. If I am not available you will seek out another administrator.
- Violation of these rules will return you to an indef blocked status.
I await your answer. - JodyB talk 19:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I have already discussed all of my edits under the discussion page.
- I have been over the rules and regulations, and frankly the people who remove MY links have not obviously
- I will not agree with making only one revision a day, nor do you have the authority to enforce that. Please read below, and do not be discouraged by the rejection.
- I quote directly from the [WP:EL]] page, "Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any.” If this does not describe what I have put up on the Celebration, Florida article, what is? Not only that but I have tried to reason with user:Mhking who has, in turn, added his own template to this page here, and continues to do so.
- I have never claimed to "own" the Celebration, Florida article, and I find it obscene and delusional for you to formulate this opinion. The very fact is, I revert the page only if no one has added information, and someone has spammed the article. I find that the town that I work for deserves to hold the organizations on the Wikipedia article. Notice in the discussion page, I have fully detailed why I have I have committed the changes, something the rest of the spammers have overlooked.
- I have a right to visit and add information to the talk page warning the person, officially, that what they are doing is not condoned by Wikipedia, which I have done. If this person will halt the spam of THIS page, which I have on here and on his page, I will leave his page alone completely.
- Notice that since a person can remove warnings from their pages, noticing that they have been warned officially, that they must abide by it, if it is appropriate. Notice that user:Mhking reverted my page illegally, despite the fact that I have informed him officially. Also, he has circumvented the 3-revert-rule, and yet I was blocked. Not only that, but the only way I can report him is directly through Wikipedia, because I can no longer edit a page. I would like you to put an immediate block on user:Mhking for reverting this page 4 times on on November 30, 2007.
- I expect a response from you, notice I have made responses to each of your recommendations, please read them thoroughly, and do not take offense. I will follow Wikipedia rules, and none other, and notice under Wikipedia's direction, I should try to resolve conflict with the user at hand, and then if all necessary contact them. I have done this, so please do as you need to do.
Meleniumshane90 21:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Stop threatening others. If you continue to do so, your talk page will be protected. --Nlu (talk) 05:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Meleniumshane90, I offered to bring you back into the community with a set of reasonable provisions. I alone have no authority other than what the community allows me. I was not required to intervene on your behalf and seek your reinstatement and I am not required to lift your block. Therefore, I will not. I am sorry. - JodyB talk 11:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment by uninvolved Admin re your response #4; No, there is no right to edit Wikipedia pages - it is a privilege, which may be removed if the edits do not conform to Wikipedia rules and policy. Also, generally, JodyB is an experienced contributor and, as an Admin, is entitled to speak on behalf of the community. The stipulations given by JodyB are substantially the conditions you will be permitted to edit under, they cannot be refused and you permitted to return to contributing. You may now or later wish to discuss the extent of them but they are to be agreed to before your block is lifted. LessHeard vanU 11:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely love the bigotry on here, you block someone who's making legitimate edits, then I get accused (and convicted without ANY proof) of being a "sock puppeteer". I have already reported all of the information to Wikipedia itself, because everyone here automatically takes sides with user:Mhking, user:Nlu, and user:The Evil Spartan. You all must be informed that user:Mhking began harassing my page by reverting the page to how he wanted it, he has been reported, and is being looked over right now. user:The Evil Spartan is also being prosecuted for the same reason.
To user:Nlu who posted "Stop threatening others. If you continue to do so, your talk page will be protected."; You obviously completely overlook that this page is set to be protected because user:Mhking and user:The Evil Spartan have gotten their jollies by reverting my page to what they want and then claim that it is "illegal to remove it". Really? This is a user page, and I set it up how I want it to be. Notice that those people haven't had a block put on them, when according to you guys, they should have an indefinite block put on them.
It is obvious to me that I cannot get anything done through you guys, and instead will have to go directly to Wikipedia. Oh and the claim of my account being a "Sock puppeteer" account, amazing how this reminds me of the Red Scare and a witch hunt. I have not made any other accounts. Think about it, if I could make another account and bypass the ip block, wouldn't I do that instead of going through all of this?? There is an obvious problem here that none of you are paying attention to, and frankly I find it to be insulting. I hope someone has the integrity to correct this issue, so Wikipedia doesn't have to handle it. Notice everyone who has done anything that I can research and find illegal by Wikipedia have been officially reported. This includes breaking the Three-revert rule, Harassment, and a list of lesser rules. Think about this, why would I waste my time if I knew I couldn't get returned as an active, productive member?
It's up to you all to make your decisions, but do not commit yourself to bias towards me, and instead focus on the actual rules broken. Then you will see that there are none, and the people who do deserve punishment are those who have attacked me, my user page, and sites that I have tried to work on.
Meleniumshane90 19:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
