User talk:Seattlehawk94

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 21:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

You recently removed a template message from an article page which included a specific request not to do so. You are now being asked not to repeat this behaviour. It is considered vandalism, and will get you blocked. Thank you. Exploding Boy 21:32, 8 June 2006 (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: "This IP address was blocked by someone name Luna something or other, this is a SHARED IP address in an office building. Some of us would like this problem fixed. It's kinda bs when a whole building is banned from this site because we all have the same IP. I see this ban is for one year, which is kind of an overkill. Why one year? Why not one month? I may have be warned 2 years ago but I didn't know about template messages not being allowed to be deleted. Thank you again I can see a month but a year is kinda an abuse of mod power. Whoever caused this banning isn't going to learn in a year. More than likely they'll find a way to get back earlier and the rest of us on these computers will have to wait for 12 more months while the real perp is posting away on this site."

Decline reason: "Since you are not blocked directly, we unfortunately can't locate the block without a few more informations, such as the blocked IP. Please follow the instructions below:

  1. Try to edit the Sandbox.
  2. If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-auto]]|...}} or {{unblock-ip]]|...}}code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section.
Thanks. -- lucasbfr talk 10:01, 12 April 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.

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: "This IP address was blocked by someone name Luna something or other, this is a SHARED IP address in an office building. Some of us would like this problem fixed. It's kinda bs when a whole building is banned from this site because we all have the same IP. I see this ban is for one year, which is kind of an overkill. Why one year? Why not one month? I may have be warned 2 years ago but I didn't know about template messages not being allowed to be deleted. Thank you again I can see a month but a year is kinda an abuse of mod power. Whoever caused this banning isn't going to learn in a year. More than likely they'll find a way to get back earlier and the rest of us on these computers will have to wait for 12 more months while the real perp is posting away on this site. Here is the IP Address that runs out of this office. 76.22.19.239"

Decline reason: "Please follow the instructions above. If you follow the directions given to you above, we will be able to gather the information needed to unblock you. Without this information, you will not be unblocked. Here's the instructions again, just in case:
Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

  1. If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
    Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
    If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
  2. Try to edit the Sandbox.
  3. If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-ip|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
  4. Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.
If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. — Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:52, 12 April 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.

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: " I do not understand a thing about any of this. I don't have an "IP Blocked" section, I don't know what is the deal. I don't know what to do with this, thing. I'm about to tell my employees to just forget this site entirely. Why is it so hard to just fix the block and be done with it? IT's not the DMV. The IP is listed above can you fix the block on THAT by looking it up. I don't know what's going on."

Decline reason: "The IP block in question has been changed to an anonymous-only block. You should now be able to edit under this current username without trouble. If you run into more problems, please let us know.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:39, 13 April 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.

Contents

[edit] unblock request

If you have a look at Special:Contributions/76.22.19.239 you can see why the IP address has been blocked, currently for a year. Someone using your IP address was abusive so it was blocked. I will ask the blocking admin for their opinion on whether to unblock. Woody (talk) 22:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I can understand that. But a year seems a little long doesn't it? A month maybe, but a year is kind of long. I don't see many other IPs getting year bans on shared units. I don't even see that many registered users getting year bans. Give a warning, suspension. Whatever but a year is an aweful long time.

Actually, a large number of shared IPs (primarily schools, universities, etc.) are given year-long IP blocks at a time, and a number of registered users are given blocks of a year or longer (I did once see one for 31 years). GBT/C 07:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
What seems odd to me is that the block isn't anon-only. To the best of my knowledge, blocks are anon-only except where there's evidence of sockpuppetry. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't have the foggiest what sockpuppetry is. I did look at the IP history of this building and did see the person in questions comments and actions. For that I'm sorry, he's been given a warning from me and is basically now going to be watched for any abuses on his computer terminals.

I did see the edits made by a person named Chicken Wings and I do see the point that abuse is made on his side as well. If you look he edits all additions to Clayton Bennett's page and erases anything negative written about the guy even if it's a fact that can be proven. If you look at that page there is nothing yet there about his court case emails that are causing a storm in these parts.

Just pointing out that abuses can be found on both sides if you look at that page's history. Everything not put there by him (Wings) is erased.

Like I said, my employee is being taken care of if that helps anything at all.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Seattlehawk94 (talk • contribs)

[edit] June 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Rogers Centre, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Johnny Au (talk) 03:52, 6 June 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) 12:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on San Jose Sharks. 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. -Djsasso (talk) 18:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit waring. 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. Djsasso (talk) 19:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't in an "edit war" I was adding sources. I added Lake Erie's OFFICIAL website's history on the unmerger. Don't understand why I was blocked. All I was doing was undoing edits and adding more sources to back it up.

It's the undoing of edits that was the cause. You should have discussed the topic on the talk page as was mentioned to you prior. The problem is that the Lake Erie team is not the NHL so their position may not be the position of the NHL. Not to mention at the bottom of that page they say they got their information from wikipedia. So you can't use a source that in turn uses the wikipedia page as a source because it becomes a circular reference. -Djsasso (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Beyond that, something we've come across time and time again is that webmasters of team sites are not hired for their knowledge of hockey history. What we need to see are sources that follow WP:RS: books, magazines, newspapers. Period. Beyond that, I see from your talk page and other discussions you've been in that some editors have recommended you read WP:PILLARS and gain a better sense of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I strongly urge you do so.  RGTraynor  21:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay...Sorry about that....

I'll keep it cool next time, you are a fair dude and at least you try to discuss taking down edits unlike some other's I've seen.

I'll chill and do better when my block ends. Sorry again.