User talk:24.53.131.244

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sleepnomore 10:02, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Are you trying to censor criticism of Jesse James Garrett? Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please do any testing here. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:48, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:49, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh, so you admit there is an edit war. If that is the case, please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Edit war instead or I will protect these two articles from anymore edits until this dispute is solved. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:54, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Articles that come to my mind that have such sections are Bill O'Reilly (commentator) and Rush Limbaugh. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Thank you for tagging those sections with {{dubious}} instead of blanking them instead. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:17, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism again

You cannot use copyrighted material for your changes to Jesse James Garrett or Ajax. Please follow the rules when adding a dispute. You are incorrectly adding dispute claims to sections.

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - Sleepnomore 02:56, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jesse James Garrett

"Michael", I've tried to make the best of this. I've not folded "in the face of adversity" as you so chargingly suggest. I've been happy to see this matter come to a close with a fair result. Criticism is still reflected in Mr Garretts article, and the majority of users have been happy with that result. That being said, your discussion in Talk:Jesse James Garrett do not belong in there, but in the talk pages. Since you are new to Wikipedia, I'll let you know that this is a process. I spoke to you about this in chat the other day and I considered you to be a reasonable person then. Your actions since then have been less than honorable, and quite frankly, cowardly. I've made no attempt to "hide" who I am, and I welcome any criticism you intend to sling at me. Take note that I did not remove or ask to have criticism removed from my profile or from the article which someone made about me on wikipedia. Having said that, lets consider the order of events. A criticism section already existed in Ajax_(programming). You've attributed that to me quite unreasonably and without basis. I have made a few moves which in retrospect were unpopular on Wikipedia. Once that was deleted, I made a criticism section on Mr Garretts page which I felt were fair considering how many critics of Mr Garrett I know. It was then that you decided to delete all evidence of criticism from both Ajax and Criticism. After we spoke, you continued to vandalize without a reasonable discussion. I had no choice but to ask for protection on Jesse James Garret while someone else felt your actions on Ajax were also inappropriate and did the same for that article. While the lockdown has occurred, we've had the opportunity to hash out some of those issues between some of the folks who would have the reasonable discussion. You were, for a brief moment, one of those people. Just as before, if you want to chat in an IM, I'm willing to do so. I'm also willing to chat on here between user pages. Our discussions, however, have no place on article talk pages. For the record, I made the request to archive the content before I archived it. I got approval from an admin, Sleepyhead81, and Delfuego (Jason) before moving it. I even left a link to the archive so anyone could still read the page if they wanted to (this is not required when archiving). The reason for the archive was because the argument on this topic was seemingly over and the unlock on the page appears to have been respected since it was removed. - Sleepnomore 02:18, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] One Last Attempt

This is my last attempt to reason with you through regular talk. After this, I go to RfC and requests to ban you from Wikipedia. You've been the one causing havoc on this site since you came here. You refused to follow Wikipedia rules. You've insulted myself, Zscout, and two others that I saw all based on on bad assumptions. You've caused so much havoc that they had to lock down two articles based on your repeated vandalism. You've continued to have personal discussions on article talk pages after the argument was agreed closed by all others involved. I may just be borderline retarded. I could be flat-out clinically retarded. That wouldn't negate the fact that you fail to follow the rules of wikipedia. Had you followed those rules instead of acting immature as you did, this argument would have come to the same conclusion a lot faster than your childish antics made possible. Again, this is your last chance to act civily and follow the rules. I suggest from a very legal and financial standpoint that you consider your actions carefully. - Sleepnomore 16:29, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

  • I don't know about being important, but I agree that you and I have better things to worry about than a continued dispute over something that has already been settled. If you are willing to drop it, I have no reason to continue either. Considering your personal relationship to Mr Garrett, it might be interesting to see you get some inside information from him on Ajax and add that information to the Ajax article as well. We all know that this name isn't going away any time really soon, and the topic will continue to grow. It would be fitting to see it grow based on information directly from the source. - Sleepnomore 18:09, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires.