User talk:24.237.109.12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. One or more of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Swordbird, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Codemonkey 18:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia, as you did to Swordbird. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Codemonkey 18:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Swordbird, you will be blocked from editing. Codemonkey 20:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Swordbird, you will be blocked from editing. Codemonkey 20:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Swordbird

There is definite value to people knowing the methods that the publisher is taken to publicize the novel, even to the point where they pass themselves off as independent readers. This is duplicitous and unacceptable in a literary context. Please stop reverting me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.237.109.12 (talk) 20:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

What you have been doing is inserting clear nonsense quotes into the article, replace the entire article with said nonsense while removing all of the legitimate content, and have been using either sockpuppets or meatpuppets to do this from multiple IPs. And you have been doing this repeatedly. This is considered vandalism, and I ask you to please stop doing this. You've been warned a few times, and you will be blocked if you don't stop. Thank you. --Codemonkey 20:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't know what a meat puppet or a sock puppet is, but what I do know is that in no way have I replaced the entire article. In fact, I believe you were the one that deleted the reviews section out of the article. I am not vandalizing, this is legitimate knowledge that should be available to people when researching this novel and deciding what publishers to support. Go ahead and block me, but you are clearly violating the three revert rule and, more importantly, this is my last day at this IP address anyway.
If you don't know what sockpuppets or meatpuppets are, click the wikilink. And the 3 revert rule does not apply to vandalism. And no you didn't replace it, I think that's one of the meat/sock puppets trying to insert the same quote. I'm sorry, but that doesn't make it any better. --Codemonkey 20:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)