User talk:Monkeyhousetim: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:48, 17 February 2007

Welcome!

Hello Monkeyhousetim, 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, do not hesitate to ask me on my talk page or see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question. Again, welcome! --Sean|Black 22:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Signing

Please note everything written on this page can be assumed to be signed by me if it has no signature Monkeyhousetim 13:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedant's corner

The following people took it upon themselves to start throwing unwarranted warnings around rather than fix the problems they saw in the articles in question. Never mind that the article had been butchered and was in drastic need of repairs, and that I was only one giving up my precious time to fix it. If you find they are wasting your time as well, consider getting them blocked. You'll notice in particular that I had no warnings at all over several years until this H. Carver started making trouble.

Wikipedia seems to have suddenly developed a new breed of hardcore pedants who view any change as vandalism whether for the better or not. What a shame that this once useful project is now spoiled by such people. I like to keep to myself but this new breed seem to love provoking people.

Such people insist on leaving their comments here for all to see, and don't like them to be deleted, seemingly ignorant of the fact that nothing is ever deleted in wiki land, they will always be here to see in the page history, I thought instead to leave them here as a gallery for the world to see how petty people can be.

If you are thinking of leaving a comment or warning here, please think whether it's really necessary before you do so. I refuse to be provoked ever again into any discussion with timewasters, so just feel free to whinge here and show the world how brilliant you are.

Here's the source of the problems - barely 2 weeks on wikipedia, and started throwing warnings left right and center just because his comments - which added nothing to the discussion and can hardly be considered 'legitimate' - got removed in a tidyup. With any luck he'll get bored after a another couple of weeks, when he realises that he won't make any friends with this approach.

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Death's Head; this is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. H. Carver 18:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk pages

Hi, I just noticed that you'd deleted some comments from my talk page. Please don't do this - as per WP:TALK, comments shouldn't be removed from talk pages. This also applies to removal of your own comments, as with Death's Head. While I'm no expert on the rules regarding this, WP:TALK is quite clear on the subject - and mentions that this may sometimes lead to accounts being blocked/banned. Thanks! --Mrph 23:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This guy, and H from earlier as well, was slandering me behind my back. Sounds like a legitimate reason to delete the comments if you ask me.

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. Additionally, do not remove warnings from this page. This is Wikipedia's property, and you are committing vandalism. You are inching closer to being blocked. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Monkeyhousetim, you will be blocked from editing. Chris Griswold (☎☓) 10:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Get this - apparently editing my own page is now vandalism!

Get this: This page is Wikipedia's property! --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 15:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See below.

Bots

The following warnings were left by bots. That is, scripts which can't possibly understand the context of edits, and yet go around randomly undoing changes and issuing threats. Great.

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments; this is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --黒雲 user:Qaddosh 23:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary block

This was the best bit folks - I'm the victim of harassment and somehow I get a block? Thanks for doing your best to alienate someone who was just trying to improve a handful of articles, and now thinks wikipedia has fallen off the cliff on it's way to being barely a footnote to history. I think I'll ask for my donation back now as well.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for personal attacks. 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 replying here on your talk page, by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} .

--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 13:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The facts

For anyone that has further trouble with troublemakers as I have, consider the following from the wikipedia rules (such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism) in your rebuttal (or just ignore them!):

Making bold edits: Wikipedians often make sweeping changes to pages in order to improve them - most of us aim to be bold when updating articles. While having large chunks of text you've written removed or substantially rewritten can be frustrating, simply making edits that noticeably alter the text or content of a pages should not be immediately labeled vandalism.

Talk page vandalism Removing the comments of other users from talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page, where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion. Please note, though, that removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon.

@@ Line 61: / Line 61: @@
 Making bold edits:
-    Wikipedians often make sweeping changes to pages in order to improve them - most of us aim to be bold when updating articles. While having large chunks of text you've written removed or substantially rewritten can be frustrating, simply making edits that noticeably alter the text or content of a pages should '''not be immediately labeled vandalism.'''
+Wikipedians often make sweeping changes to pages in order to improve them - most of us aim to be bold when updating articles. While having large chunks of text you've written removed or substantially rewritten can be frustrating, simply making edits that noticeably alter the text or content of a pages should '''not be immediately labeled vandalism.'''
 Talk page vandalism
-    Removing the comments of other users from talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism. '''Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate''', and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. '''The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page''', where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion. Please note, though, that removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon.
+Removing the comments of other users from talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism. '''Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate''', and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. '''The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page''', where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion. Please note, though, that removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon.