Wikipedia:Requests for comment/OleMaster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See User:OleMaster's talk page. Most of his edits seem fine, but he's engaged in minor vandalism in the past, and uses personal attacks and foul language in edit summaries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jemiller226 (talk • contribs).

Yeah, thanks alot, arseholio. You have certainly been granted the first prize for NEGLECTING A MAJORITY OF GOOD CONTRIBUTION'S, as you YOURSELF stated. Not even had I to mention that, but you "elegantly" brush over it, neglecting it in a such arrogantly ignoring fashion, 'rÂt there should be made a special mention of this feat in the ten o'clock new's. Aha? And so I've done some bad stuff. Shit, everyone has, you PANIC on the inside. I'm admittin' it, but my INTENTION was good, and if you checked the nature of most of the 'Vandalism', you'll see it mostly concern's grammar, so blame my fuckin' teacher, OKAY? I don't know why this is brought up, and I'm not makin'rê fuzz, 'cuz everyone has a skeleton in'êir closet before'êy become a santa's little helper.

Shit, I might not be the best man in the world, but Ringo, I'm tryin'.

'Spite what Yoda say's, there IS such a thing.

Personal attacks? Pssh! Call it personal DEFENCE.

Everytime sometimes takes time out of their a- uh, day, to lash out on me for every error I make, I whip'êm back, 'cours I get the blame just 'cuz of my harshness and honesty. THEY, on the other side, is n't even CONSIDERED to be punished, even if THEY drew first blood and decided to jump on the chanche to take me down and put a black mark on my card before I got a chanche to redeem myself or fix my wrongful edit, heck, they jump from nowhere in a matter of second's like hungry hyena's to appear as the better man, the gloryful angel, ecetra, and ALL THAT BULLSHIT.

And you're buyin' it? PSHH! And callin' for people to continue harrasin' ME (As I don't on THEIR user-page's no matter how temptin'.) and as for 'foul language' in edit summarie's...well, Pretty Boy Loyd, wake up: It ain't a perfect world, and we DO cuss, and we CAN be in a pissy, bitter mood, and where else to non-chalantly just write than in a edit-summary where it's directed at no-one in particular? It's not like anyone read's em, aside for the reason, and it's nothin' personal. If it was, well..

As I said, I would'a gone to'rêir user-space's 'stêad'o.

Have a merry day.--84.202.43.13 21:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

(O.M.R.)

I just want to say that I've exhaustively gone through every single contribution that OleMaster has made, and I would estimate off the top of my head that fewer than 10% adhered to wikipedia's minimum standards for inclusion. Almost all included poor spelling and grammar and most of them contributed point of view or nonsense. I could be mistaken, but I don't believe that a single edit OleMaster has ever made continues to exist in that articles current form (which is not to say that that's a perfect guide for determining an edit's quality, but in this case it's very telling). In short OleMaster may have pure intentions, but he has nevertheless failed to actually achieve a "GOOD CONTRIBUTION" Charles (Kznf) 15:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)