User talk:143.231.249.141/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Contents 1 Congressional edits? 2 July 2005 3 October 2005 4 November 2005 5 December 2005 5.1 December 6 5.2 December 7 5.3 December 14 5.4 December 16 5.5 December 28 6 January 2006 6.1 January 3 6.2 January 6 6.3 January 17 6.4 January 25 6.5 January 27 6.6 January 29 7 How many times can a user be blocked? 8 Nice propaganda from the Politburo! 9 RFC to centralise discussion 10 Newspaper report 11 February warnings

Congressional edits?

For full story see Congressional Staffer Edits

Content moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/United States Congress. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 09:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

July 2005

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and gives you many benefits, including:

• The use of a username of your choice
• The ability to view all your contributions via a "My contributions" link
• Your own user page
• Your own talk page which, if you choose, also allows users to send you messages without knowing your e-mail address
• The use of your own personal watchlist to which you can add articles that interest you
• The ability to start new pages
• The ability to rename pages
• The ability to upload images
• The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website
• The eligibility to become an administrator
• The right to be heard in votes and elections
• Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.

We hope you enjoy your time here on Wikipedia and that you choose to become a Wikipedian by creating an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, you should sign your name to your posts and comments with ~~~~. ‡ Jarlaxle 20:34, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

October 2005

To user (if they ever read this): Liberal != Socialist. There's a good reason why there's two separate articles. Oh, and a reading of the NPOV guidelines wouldn't be a bad idea either... -- Palfrey 16:50, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

This message regards the article Hurricane Katrina. Do not add political commentary about the Davis-Bacon Act to the article, it goes against the Neutral Point of View policy of Wikipedia. Titoxd^(?!?) 18:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

November 2005

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Wikibofh 22:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. -Willmcw 20:49, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 15:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Please stop blanking the David Dreier article. If you would like to share your concerns about the article, do so at Talk:David Dreier. Continued blanking or vandalism of articles will result in your being blocked, again. Moncrief 04:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

December 2005

December 6

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --JMurphy 07:33, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the page First Amendment to the United States Constitution: This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Nlu 17:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

December 7

Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 14:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hrs, for breaking the three-revert rule in Rick Renzi ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

December 14

You are doing it again. Please stop making unhelpful edits on Rick Renzi, or you will be blocked again. – ugen64 23:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

December 16

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. FCYTravis 18:45, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

December 28

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Doc ^ask? 20:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sango123 (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

January 2006

January 3

This message is regarding the page Rick Kahn. Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 21:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

January 6

Someone posting from the account, while editing the article on Dana Priest, removed the adjectives "important" and "prestigious", on the grounds that they were POV.

"Important" described Ms Priest's articles. Ms Priest's November 2, 2005 article broke the story of the CIA black sites. If that wasn't an important story, then what story is important? The repercussions from that story continue to echo two months later. It will be one of the most highly referenced stories of 2005. To challenge that it deserves to be described as important, is, IMO, itself POV.

The MacArthur Foundation grants are prestigious -- not as prestigious as the Nobel Prize, but, I suggest, in the very next rank. Removing the adjective prestigious, is, IMO, itself POV. -- Geo Swan 16:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

January 17

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! --Winter 19:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

January 25

Regarding the page Connie Mack IV, please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Hurricane111 17:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

January 27

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing Wikipedia the next time you vandalize a page. If you wish to dispute the content of an article, please do so on the article talk page rather then blanking material without explaination. Consider also for a moment the example you are setting given where you are editing from. -Loren 05:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that's it. You've been warned numerous times about vandalizing articles but your most recent edits clearly indicate that you have no intention of stopping. No one is above the law here and it doesn't matter whether you're some staffer on Capitol Hill or some bored kid sitting in a computer lab in an elementary school in Australia. You have been blocked from editing for 48 hours to allow you to think it over. You've made some good edits in the past and I'd encourage you to edit constructively in the future rather then vandalising. -Loren 21:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I have unblocked this shared IP after being contacted an editor from this address, assuming good faith per policy. To whoever it was vandalising from this IP, please bear in mind that whatever you do reflects upon your orgranization and refrain from further vandalism. It's a sad day when we have to treat a House IP the same way we treat an AOL one. [1] -Loren 21:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

January 29

Due to vandalism, you have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. — FireFox • T • 15:02, 29 January 2006

How many times can a user be blocked?

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/United States Congress. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 09:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice propaganda from the Politburo!

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/United States Congress. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 09:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

RFC to centralise discussion

In order to centralise discussion and to discuss your behaviour, I've filed a Requests for comment against you to discuss your behaviour so the community can better evaluate your worth as a contributor. It is available at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/United States Congress. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 08:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Newspaper report

• Lehmann, Evan. (January 27, 2006) "Rewriting history under the dome: Online 'encyclopedia' allows anyone to edit entries, and congressional staffers do just that to bosses' bios". Lowell (Mass.) Sun. - accessed January 20, 2006

February warnings

Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles[2]. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. —This user has left wikipedia 14:10 2006-02-01

Regarding the Mussgrave article: Please do not remove info unless you can back it up with a fact [3]