User talk:212.22.3.8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Attention:

This host, dickens.arp-uk.org, is registered to ARP, and may be shared by multiple users. If the organization uses proxy servers or firewalls, this IP address may in fact represent many users at many physical computers.

For this reason, a message intended for one person may be received by another and a block may be shared by many. If you are editing from this address and are frustrated by irrelevant messages, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself. In some cases, you may temporarily be unable to create an account due to efforts to fight vandalism; if so, please see here.

If you are autoblocked repeatedly, we encourage you to contact your Internet service provider or IT department and ask them to contact Wikimedia's XFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on their proxy servers so that our editing blocks will affect only the intended user. Alternatively, you can list the IP at Wikipedia:WikiProject on XFFs.

Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking - if a block is needed, administrators should consider using a soft block with the template {{anonblock|optional comment}} as the block reason.

Note: In the event of vandalism from this address, abuse reports may be sent to your network administrator for further investigation.
IT staff who want to monitor vandalism from this IP address can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

why did you change pandoras name so it didnt came to her page but to another??? dont change things that allready are good. get it!--Matrix17 10:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not change any page - why would I change anything connected with Pandora? Never heard of her - please get facts right - get it!

Your recent edit to Sohail Tamradge Hassan (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 15:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

If you actually look at the page you will see that this person is of no notability at all merely the father of an actor. I accept your apologies.

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Lulu (singer), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kariteh 12:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

In what way is it personal? The album mentioned was shelved (fact) the supporting singles were not successful (fact - see discography) her BOT album was a flop (see discography) I have listed correct and factual information and yet you deem this to be violation? Please explain rather than use Gestapo tactics.

Please read WP:CITE.
And "Gestapo tactics"? Seems like you should not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kariteh 14:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Lulu (singer), you will be blocked from editing. Kariteh 14:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

please do report me as i wish to take this further.

Contents

[edit] WP:3RR on Lulu (singer)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lulu (singer). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 which gains a consensus among editors. -- Merope 14:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Can i add in fairness the actual statements this user made and corrections were right and user "katieh" is wrong. 1999 did see a witrhdrawn album by lulu.

I have tried to contact the otehr person involved but to no avail. I would suggets this person is not suited to reversing edits if he/she cannot contact back. Looking at other feedback this person has been warned before.

[edit] Relevance of comment added to Matt Bianco

12:58, 21 August 2007 212.22.3.8 (Talk) (6,764 bytes) (Undid revision 152567300 by Pdfpdf (talk) sorry but it is - maybe take to discussion?)

sorry but it is - How is it relevant? And what is it relevant to? If you feel it is relevant, you need to explain how/why - either as part of the text, or as a footnote/reference.
maybe take to discussion? - As I said, see User talk:Pukkabosh. Clearly you didn't look, so the following is copied from there to here. Pdfpdf 13:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

-- Matt Bianco --

(Undid revision 150965732 by Jfdwolff (talk) relevant as its current)
Yes, it's current, but currency is not a justification for relevance. What relevance does this fact have? Who is Lee Dennison and why/how is Lee Dennison notable? Pdfpdf 14:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for saying its current. If other pages can have people are currently dating so and so then this is relevant. Lee Dennison is an international casting director, has his own website, is notable and therefore is relevant. Thanks.

<deleted>

Jfdwolff has been unusually detailed in his explanation: personal life of individual members is arguably not relevant unless it directly pertains to the band's future (e.g. new partner stops band member touring) - I see no evidence for that here. I'm afraid I have to agree with him.

As I implied before, relevance is the important criteria - not currency. (And by itself, not notability either).
I have to ask you again: What is the relevance of your addition?
(Also, when there is a relevance that is not self-evident, you also need to supply comment/footnote/reference of the supporting evidence.)

You've made the comment: if a partner is not valid then majority of all entries are invlaid on this site. I think you've missed the point; mention of a partner may be valid, if it is relevant. Can you point me to an example of a mention of a partner please? If so, I'll see if I can explain to you why it is relevant.

I hope you find this useful. Feel free to ask questions if it isn't clear. Best wishes, Pdfpdf 14:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Please sign your posts with four tildes - it tells when you made the post.

--More on Matt Bianco--

At the suggestion of Pdfpdf (above), I am just dropping a message to explain why I keep on removing your addition from Matt Bianco. The article is clearly about the band and its music, as one would expect in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias will generally not deviate into the private lives of band members in such articles unless this is immediately relevant to the article; for instance, the The Beatles article definitely needs to mention Yoko Ono, because her appearance in John Lennon's life radically changed the history of The Beatles. You have not indicated why Lee Dennison would shape the history of Matt Bianco. Furthermore, Wikipedia aims to trace every bit of content to reliable sources; do you think you could provide a reliable source for the Reilly-Dennison link?

The solution for all this would be to write an article about Mark Reilly; that article, being about his person, would definitely merit mention of his most current relationship (provided WP:RS and our biography guidelines are adhered to).

I hope this explains matters. Please note that none of this is personal, and that I'm very happy to help out or provide further explanations if you want. Cheers. JFW | T@lk 22:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for this and I will perhaps start a new page for Mark v soon with relevant links and info. Its a shame though that user Pdfpdf resorts to bullying tactics when addressing other people especially user pukkabosh whom i saw was new and it hardly entices people to resolve situations whereas your comments are useful and polite and unpersonal. Thanks again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.22.3.8 (talk) 12:51, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

I'm quite surprised to read that you feel I am resorting to bullying tactics. I've only copied a small portion of the conversation to your talk page. I would very much appreciate it if you would read the complete conversation on pukkabosh's and jfdwolff's talk pages, and explain to me how I'm bullying. I've gone to great efforts to try to explain things to pukkabosh, and even managed to convince jfdwolff, a much more experienced and eloquent user than I am (who was initially loath to explain his actions), to explain to pukkabosh why jfdwolff was reverting pukkabosh's contributions. So I'm quite surprised, and a little upset, to read that you feel I'm bullying, and I would very much appreciate understanding why you say I am. In anticipation of your reply, Thank you Pdfpdf 16:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
By-the-way, I am the person who copied jfdwolff's answer here. I agree with you that he has done a much better job of explaining his actions than I was able to. If you wish him to receive your compliment and thanks, you may want to post them on his talk page as he would be unaware of this conversation here. Pdfpdf 16:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lee Dennison nonsense

You repeatedly claim that people are gay and dating Lee Dennison.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6


Six pages where you've claimed this. Why do you keep claiming this - there is no evidence of it. And you keep reverting everytime someone corrects it. I've reported you for vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blahblax (talk • contribs) 18:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hermann Göring‎

Do not accuse other editors of vandalism on good faith edits. I removed that "fact" per WP:TRIVIA. If you feel it is crucial to the overall article, bring it to the talk page first. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 15:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

DO NOT simply remove facts without approaching me first either - totally rude. The fact is that this is the ionly film to portray Goering as a cross-dresser which is NOT mentioned elsewhere in text. {{unsigned|212.22.3.8]]
That's actually pretty funny. I'm dealing with an anonymous IP and I have no idea if this is one person's address or it's institutional. But I'm supposed to check with you before I make an edit? That's a good one. freshacconcispeaktome 16:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not on Hermann Göring‎. Thank you. Do not accuse other editors of vandalism for good faith edits. Bring it to the talk page freshacconcispeaktome 16:00, 19 February 2008 (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.

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:Hermann Göring. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. freshacconcispeaktome 16:10, 19 February 2008 (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.

[edit] May 2008

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Danny Dyer. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ~~ [Jam][talk] 09:59, 22 May 2008 (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.

A source was clearly added if you bothered to look (212.22.3.8 (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC))

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Danny Dyer, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Unless you can find a proper source (from a reliable news site like the BBC News or Digital Spy) then it is unreferenced. There is no reference to this on his personal website. You will be blocked if you continue to add this information without a source. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:22, 22 May 2008 (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.

You are obviously Lee Dennison. What you do is sad. Really sad. Keep adding your name onto articles saying your dating people. PATHETIC. I'm going to spread the word around London about what you do. blahblax (talk) 23:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I AM NOT LEE - however you have been reported for threatening behaviour VILE -