User talk:67.72.98.87

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 18:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Night Gyr 17:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Your edit to Black Death

Your recent edit to Black Death 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. // Tawkerbot2 02:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rudolph

Didn't remove anyone's words, liar. I changed a header. You should go borrow a brain. --67.72.98.87 18:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

You are not suppose to remove people's words on the talk page! Leave the pages alone. If don't like what you are reading then reading something else. TripleH1976 18:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of what you want to call it a person still wrote it. You have no right to remove it! TripleH1976 18:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

How long have you been a clown? When two sections were merged into this one someone assigned a new header. That's "changing someone's words" by your "logic." --67.72.98.87 18:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


User revandalized the page after TripleH's first removal of the vandalization Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Talk:Eric_Robert_Rudolph, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Lordkazan 18:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Final Warning

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Lordkazan 18:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop removing warnings from your talk page. Chodorkovskiy (talk) 18:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Please tell your MoveOn.Org pals I don't respond to their nonsensical threats. Wikipedia is becoming a cesspool of leftist nonsense. When even Usama bin Laden is not called a terrorist Rudilph should not be called one either. How 'bout some consistancy? --67.72.98.87 18:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Restored the above comment originally posted as signed because another user accidentally removed it while reverting one of 67.72.98.87's removals of the warnings from his page Lordkazan 18:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

STOP REMOVING WARNINGS FROM YOUR EDIT PAGE! You have been reported to the admins and have drawn the attention of no less than FOUR users reverting your vandalism. I saw your right wing biased comment before another user accidentally reverted it while reverting your removal of warnings from your page. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT YOUR SOURCE FOR POV-PUSHING RIGHT WING NEOFASCIST NONESENSE. Go to StormFront and Free Republic if you want to engage in that activity. BTW: Osama is referet to as a terrorist Lordkazan 18:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Your Personal attack has been noted and reported. --67.72.98.87 18:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Give up child! You are not going to win. TripleH1976 18:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Nothing in my previous comment constitutes a personal attack unless you add non-dictionary definitions to the words. Furthermore your reports are not going to be paid attention to after, now, no less than 5 users are watching you Lordkazan 18:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

It's out of my hands and yours, yet your claim my pointing out Usama bin Laden's article does not call him a terrorist while Rudolph's article does is "PUSHING RIGHT WING NEOFASCIST NONESENSE" is clearly tendentious and insulting. 'splain it to the person who investigates. --67.72.98.87 19:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

They're not going to listen to your whining after all the vandalism you engaged in, and your comment at 18:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC) whining about wikipedia being a "cesspool of leftist nonsense". Follow the link to Militant Islam. Enjoy your ban, stay off wikipedia if you feel the need to vandalize. Go to stormfront and freep for that Lordkazan 19:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

67.72.98.87 may have been incivil, but he certainly didn't vandalise Eric Robert Rudolph. In fact, both him and TripleH1976 were blocked for WP:3RR which is point of view warring. I suggest everyone involved reread the definition of vandalism at Wikipedia:Vandalism. The article has now been fully protected and no edits will be made until a consensus has been reached on the talk pages. --  Netsnipe  ►  19:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Consensus was already reached on the talk page prior to this users vandalism. Lordkazan 23:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eric Robert Rudolph

 You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. (31 hours)

--  Netsnipe  ►  18:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I believe if you look more closely you'll note I did not revert the article but each edit had unique changes. You might also note:

Here is where I tried to discuss the changes I made: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eric_Robert_Rudolph&oldid=74177069

Here is where Lordkazan deleted the entry I made on the discussion page without comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eric_Robert_Rudolph&direction=next&oldid=74177818

Ironically you'll see above where TripleH and Lordkazan complained that I had changed a header claiming incorrectly I changed someone words. Hypocrisy at work.

Ironically, even though TripleH1976, as you point out incorrectly, complained I vandalized the article he has apparently now been permanently banned for vandalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TripleH1976

Given they are both guilty of the same brand of hypocrisy IMO Tripleh1976 is a sockpuppet of Lordkazan. --67.72.98.91 23:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Tripleh1976 was not indefinitely banned for vandalising Eric_Robert_Rudolph. He was indefinitely banned for vandalising his own user talk page with a link to Godhatesfags.com after his block was extended to a week after personally attacking the reviewing administrator who refused to lift his block. Tripleh1976 and Lordkazan are definitely not the same person because if they were, the Autoblocker would have stopped Lordkazan leaving messages on my talk page after Tripleh1976's block. --  Netsnipe  ►  05:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To all anti-vandals here

Review all other edits by this user http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=67.72.98.87 Lordkazan 18:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Human brain (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. // AntiVandalBot 22:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Famous (song) (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. For future editing tests use the sandbox. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 07:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Shrimp, you will be blocked from editing. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. ChrischTalk 04:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. Academic Challenger 04:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] October 2007

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Tionne Watkins. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:35, 10 October 2007 (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.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. -- SiobhanHansa 21:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] November 2007

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Tionne Watkins, you will be blocked from editing. Videmus Omnia Talk 21:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.
You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

--Ed (Edgar181) 21:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] December 2007

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Art Bell. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.MilkTaco 17:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Flatbush, Brooklyn, you will be blocked from editing. MilkTaco 17:49, 3 December 2007 (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, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Capitalistroadster (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 fortnight in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy due to persistent vandalism originating from your proxy server or network. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

—C.Fred (talk) 02:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)