User talk:82.181.234.211

January 2011

Hello, 82.181.234.211. You have new messages at Fumitol's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Rurik, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Yopie (talk) 00:18, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

May 2010

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Leopold, Prince of Hohenzollern. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. SamEV (talk) 01:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

same to yourself. In addition, do not erase commentys on talkpages from other editors. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 01:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:Leopold, Prince of Hohenzollern. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. SamEV (talk) 01:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

clearly, Mr SamEV has too thin a skin. It is not a personal attack to criticise the comment of SamEV. that's a basic thing: some editor (such as SamEV) could well make a stupid and unwarranted and untenable comment, and to point out such a stupidity is not personal attack but a part of proper editing encyclopedia. If SamEV does not want to see crirticism aganist his incorrect views, them SamEV simply needs to stop make edits (deletions) and comments - in that way there'll not be anthing to citicize against in his work.... and, this problematic stance of SsmEV is not helped by him distributing unwarranted tags as 'cautions'. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 07:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Principality of Seborga, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Yopie (talk) 10:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Unfirtunately, mr Yopie, in his eagerness to defend something there whic is either original research, or worse, an unfounded allegation, edited away my query for citation, this shows how misguided and unwelcome are Yopie's that editing with proncipality of Seborga. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 12:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: User talk:Yopie. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Yopie (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

this shows that Yopie deliberately edited away a warranted warning to him. After which, the Yopie came here to accuse. I am really wondering what sort of twisted personality this Yopie is. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 14:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Wikipedia, please always use English, no matter to whom you address your comments. This is so that comments may be comprehensible to the community at large. If the use of another language is unavoidable, please provide a translation of the comments. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. Yopie (talk) 13:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This accusatiuon of using language other than English, seems wrong. My comments have beebn in english. yopie should show with precise links where a comment is not english, if wants to contimue in this unwarranted vein. All in all, this behavior from Yopie shows how twisted a personality he is. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 14:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, 82.181.234.211, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Outback the koala (talk) 21:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, 82.181.234.211. You have new messages at Outback the koala's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Outback the koala (talk) 21:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hohenstaufen descendants

to Outback-koala: you are wrong to make an edit that there are no hohenstaufen descendants alive. Every good genealogisat knows that females of the Hohenstaufens have a lot of descendanys alive today. It is only the male line which went extinct with Conradin. And this fact is visible in plenty of published genealogies. please stop to make edits which are factually incorrect..... 82.181.234.211 (talk) 23:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Here is visible the allegation which Mr Koala is now trying to hide. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 22:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I must say that the Koala is out of touch with reality, or possibly not cognizant of terminological diffeeence between women and illegitimate. There exist next to no people who dare to claim that women and descent through them would be 'illegitimate'. as of fine line, mr Koala obviously is on the wrong side of any fine line, alleging that descendants via perfectly legitimate women and trgeir marriages woould be illegitimate.. I sincerely hope that Mr Koala stops spreading his very peculiar notions about geneaogy and legitimacy. By the way, the word 'dependent' (instead of descendant) speaks already for the Koala not grasping even the basic terminology in this. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 21:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Ivangorod

Before you start getting into trouble with your behavior, please take a look at our verifiability policy and the no personal attacks conduct policy.

I have nothing against you adding information to that particular article, but please either source your additions, or at least link to proper articles so there is background. Note that per WP:V "[a]nything that requires but lacks a source may be removed". Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 28, 2010; 16:27 (UTC) P.S. Note that the discussion page is not an acceptable source.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 28, 2010; 16:29 (UTC)

sane editors question such with a request for source. I have rarely seen such behavior as that of Ezhiki. Obviously, Ezhiki has not even read the discussion page mentioned, as there is mentioned a source in a printed encyclopedia. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Please calm down. Whatever you wrote on the talk page is merely your opinion/suggestion; it can't be used to source the article. The bits you added to the article should be explicitly sourced. I, indeed, almost never remove unsourced information when it is reasonably accurate, but in this case I can't even verify it properly, hence this removal and a request for reliable, properly formatted citations. When sources are requested but not provided, you should not be acting surprised when your additions are removed. If I could transfer the sources you allude to on the talk page, I would, but like I said, I am unable to verify them, so this job falls to you. Please follow-up.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 28, 2010; 16:41 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. M.K. (talk) 07:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

MacLeod

I don't think those alternate names should be added into the articles. They look ridiculous. The family tree you linked to isn't a reliable source. Searching Google, I can't find any good sources that call the three men by these names. The MacLeods at this time were Gaels. I'm not sure exactly how to handle the chiefs. John isn't counted as one, but he did take Lewis by force [1]. I think it's worth noting though that society doesn't regard him as a chief.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 09:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Mantal has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/luopa/manttaali.doc.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

In my view, this bot is an idiot. His works in this case are counter-productive. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 17:25, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Mantal do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/luopa/, http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/luopa/manttaali.doc.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 17:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

The recent edit you made to Mantal constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Fumitol|talk|cont 17:47, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Fumitol is doing vandalism in his blindness. he did not even take a look what were the diffs. The reason is a bot running amok. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 17:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

And here we see how the "Fumitol" finally admits that his removal was excessive, that he did remove much more than the part he wants to see as "vandalism": [2]. Fumitol moreover has no sound judgment about what is vabdalism and what is not vandalism. Fumitol obviously accuses anything as vandalism. 82.181.234.211 (talk) 18:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)