User talk:M1$CR3ANT

December 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, User:M1$CR3ANT, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will be removed shortly (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. 220 of ^Borg 03:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is this even a real user? M1$CR3ANT (talk) 03:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive about your disruptive edits. The next time you continue to edit disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked on further notice. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 03:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 03:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will stop reverting and try to work towards a more agreeable version. I don't know if other users will be so charitable. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User:M1$CR3ANT. Thank you. --220 of ^Borg 03:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... It's a work in progress. It would be rash. In the mean time, it would be good to know how to improve it into something less controversial. --M1$CR3ANT (talk) 04:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to appeal the action. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 04:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well... We would all like to hear what you have to say for yourself (Note that if your recreate the page as it was you may be blocked without further notice). Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 04:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I threw together some interesting imagery to foster a kind of lounge atmosphere, but it wasn't really refined yet. Then I added some temporary advertising. The blatant reactionism was surprising. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 04:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that you tagged the page with almost every tag on wikipedia and that if you wanted to foster a lounge atmosphere you would not have put in the pornography as that violently conflicts with a relaxing lounge atmosphere as well as the edit warring and not improving the page I think the reaction was justified. If you want to have another try then do so without the pornography and tag bombing.Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 04:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted a sort of laid back place, hence the porno. Maybe the use of categories was a bit rich, but just meant to be temporary. Nothing violence here, just relaxation. Then they came in and ruined it. It's probably because they're uptight about the porno and nothing else. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 04:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The tag bombing was the major issue. ~~Most of us don't give a shit about the porn per WP:NOTCENSORED~~ When you place porn in without context it gets removed as you just saw. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 04:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Also: We have a policy against personal attacks like this one. Do not make such edits again in the future or you may be blocked without further notice. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 04:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, apologies. I just hope that in the future I can choose the uploaded images which I find useful for my page without any unreasonable attacks such as all out removal. I'll try to come up with some form of spreading the word that doesn't contravene the thick volumes of rules. It'll be cool if the commons has some jazz audio samples for the lounge. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 04:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

I have removed the image from your user page under the Wikipedia policy spelled out at WP:User pages#Images: Content clearly intended as sexually provocative (images and in some cases text) or to cause distress and shock that appears to have little or no project benefit or using Wikipedia only as a web host or personal pages or for advocacy, may be removed by any user (or deleted), subject to appeal at deletion review. Please do not restore this image unless you have a consensus of editors here to do so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem shocking or distressing. It's an erotic drawing. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 05:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice the part that says "Content clearly intended as sexually provocative (images and in some cases text) ... that appears to have little or no project benefit or using Wikipedia only as a web host or personal pages or for advocacy, may be removed by any user (or deleted) Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 05:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

M1$CR3ANT, perhaps you might like a picture from Erotic art of William-Adolphe Bouguereau, or similar? I would think that these are acceptable. They are Art after all! - 220 of ^Borg 05:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It'll do. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 06:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re Userpages

Please see Wikipedia:User pages#What may I not have in my user pages.? Regards, -220 of ^Borg 05:25, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I respect your right to have artwork on your user page. However, given that Wikipedia is a public space, it's not really kosher. We try to limit socially-taboo material to relevant pages (articles on the piece, for example). Please don't re-add it to your user page, because, after all, there are policies against that. Cheers, m.o.p 05:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, to the editors bringing up the user page policy, I note that that's just an image that's part of my normal user page and the atmosphere I'm trying to create, as useful to Wikipedia as any other editor's casual user page. Nothing about this erotic image in this 21st century usage is clearly meant to be provocative since the participants are all consenting adults. An intelligent editor above states above that most "don't give a shit about the porn per WP:NOTCENSORED". After all, all of this is sourced from Wikipedia itself. One can stumble upon it using the "random page" button. M1$CR3ANT (talk) 05:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTCENSORED doesn't excuse what you were doing. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 05:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But enough of the deleted version with the supposed misuse of categories. What of the present one without the categorical advertising and contentious erotic art rather than porno? M1$CR3ANT (talk) 05:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You need to remember that this is not MySpace, Facebook, or a lounge: User pages exist to further the encyclopedia, not to set ambiance. Some decoration is acceptable, as per the policies you have been provided - as long as they continue to further the concept of the encyclopedia. Recall that in the long run, all pages - including your userpage - are the property of the Wikimedia Foundation, and are subject to all the same rules (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]