User talk:Sanitycult

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:HolyBibble1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:HolyBibble1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU≈talk 02:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism warning

If you continue to vandalize pages as you did to "Leif Ericson" your IP address will be blocked from using Wikipedia. - House of Scandal (talk) 15:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

That's not exactly fair, there was no 'in other media' section, the day was said to be an invented holiday on Spongebob Squarepants, i made the edit, realized i didn't have a source and that it might be too obscure or pointless for the article so i IMMEDIATELY removed it. I don't see your problem, i don't think it's vandalism if 1. it's not intended to be, it was a plot element in the show and it seemed a good idea to add at the time, i mean really South Park and Robot chicken is mentioned whenever they mention anything in their episodes it always ends up as part of the 'other media' or trivia or pop culture section. 2. as i stated, i removed the edit about three minutes after i posted only because i didn't have a reference and i felt it was too tangent in retrospect. You shouldn't threaten people with your pointless warnings after simple SUBJECTIVE mistakes. I didn't vandalize the article i simply added content that I later felt didn't need to be added, oops, ok? But if you want to 'call me out' or whatever, go ahead, i'm sure other people will completely agree with you that i am the criminal mastermind of the century. Maybe i'll put on a cape for you, ok? Kudos, captain freedom!

[edit] Welcome, from 21655!

Hello! I've noticed that you have edited Wikipedia without logging in to an account. It's great that you've been contributing; however, I urge you to create an account. Here is a list of the benefits of having an account:

There are no cons to signing up for an account. In fact, you can find even more pros at the "why create an account" page! Signing up is completely free and you don't need to enter any personal information! Plus you can have a user page, which you can use to show your interests, style, or nearly whatever! So, unless you can think of a con, please sign up for an account right now! 21655 ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ? 15:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Master Mahan

I would advise against removing the material from the Master Mahan article that you announced on the talk page that you were going to remove. There is no consensus to do so. If you'd like, the appropriate response would be to try to build a consensus to remove it by seeking input from other editors, not just deciding that your opinion is obviously the correct one and that it should trump anyone else's opinion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Courtesy notice

This is a courtesy notice to let you know that I have posted a request at the Wikiquette alert page for editor input regarding my concerns about some of your recent comments on Talk:Master Mahan. You are not required to do anything and it is not expected that the discussions we have been having will be continued there. The link to my posting is here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 2008

Regarding your comments on Master Mahan: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. This is in regards to the Wikiquette alert filed by User:Good Olfactory. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Master Mahan. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Please discuss the content dispute constructively in the article's talk page instead of edit warring. A block may occur if you continue to revert without discussion. If you are unable to resolve the dispute with Olfactory alone, please seek a third opinion or file a Request for Comment to bring in additional editors that can help establish consensus. Thank you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)