User talk:68.198.236.57

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] I have registered

I have registered under the name user:mentsch, here is my talk page [[1]]. If you want to post a message, please do it there. Thanks. 68.198.236.57 03:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

You have vandalised the BMG article here. The source is here as well as the NYT. --Shmaltz 19:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The article says that they sign they will agree to all rules, the rules include the laptop rule for which there is a source, there is no good faith in taking that out, it is pure vandalism.--Shmaltz 20:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Are you telling me there is no rule in Yeshivah not to have a laptop? Do you want me to post a copy of that paper on Wikipedia? will that make you happy?--Shmaltz 20:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Now you are getting the idea. All edits must be sourced. Through sourcing you are not making me happy, rather you are merely complying with wikipedia policies.68.198.236.57 20:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

No you are a vandal, tell me does someone need to prove that white is white because someone is denying it?--Shmaltz 20:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Please control the urge to engage in immature accusations. Also, while the yeshiva prohibits internet usage in the dorms, this does not necessarily mean that laptops are prohibited. Please source it if you want to include it. 68.198.236.57 20:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
What I wrote was NOT conclusions but facts. Are you telling me you are a student at BMG and that the rule is not true?--Shmaltz 20:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I decline involvement in a discussion that is irrelevant. The only sourced rule is that which says that students should not access the internet. This rule does not logically seem to have any correlation to a blanket rule prohibiting laptops. If you believe there is such rule, please source it. 68.198.236.57 20:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talkpage rights

user:Jayjg, please use utmost caution and be careful of abusing your position as an administrator. I don't believe it is your job to police my talkpage. If indeed it is wikipedia policy that your "official notice" must remain here, than, in the future, please be sure to quote the policy to avoid any misunderstanding. 68.198.236.57 04:17, 4 December

Actually, I,ve done the research for you, and I quote from wikipedia policy vandalism
"Talk page vandalism-
Deleting the comments of other users from Talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long Talk page to a separate file and then remove the text from the main Talk page. The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion."
Actually, Jayjg it seems that you engaged in vandalism (hopefully accidental) by removing this comment from my talkpage. Please take the time to know the rules well. It is important for administrators to set a good example, instead of inventing non-existent rules. Thanks.68.198.236.57 08:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The relevant part of the policy, which had existed there for months, was apparently unilaterally deleted on June 9. Your unwarranted accusations and uncivil claims of vandalism are little more that retaliation for your 3RR block; please think of more collegial ways of interacting in the future. Jayjg (talk) 15:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Amazing- you refer me to a rule that was edited out of the policy over six months ago. And not "unilaterally" as you would have it, but after months of discussion going back to April, 06. See the archived discussions there please. Also, it is clear that you cannot erase my own comments from my own talkpage without a good reason. Until now I have assumed good faith and I would like to continue to do so. Take this as friendly advice: please do not erase comments from my talkpage. Good luck 68.198.236.57 17:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your insight, I always just knew it as a rule, and didn't know it was removed (I am an admin on the Yiddish wikipedia, we have had arguments about this before). Thanks again.--Shmaltz 04:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, that 'users cannot remove warnings' stuff was first thought up late last year, was "unilaterally" inserted onto the policy page despite various objections and was then removed and re-added repeatedly until being taken out for good after extensive discussions and finally general agreement to can it on the admin noticeboard (well after the edit of mine cited above). Subsequently the related 'wr' templates which had been created to 'enforce' it were deleted by a strong consensus. The practice just caused too many problems and was never an actual accepted policy... just something some people stuck onto the policy page with no prior history or consensus and then kept restoring until it was officially squashed. In any case, less hostility... more being helpful. Always a good plan all around. --CBD 21:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UserCB

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from User talk:CBDunkerson. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 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. Budgiekiller 19:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I was just moving my comment to the end of the page. Are you a bot ?68.198.236.57 19:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
As noted, looks like 68.198 was just fixing/moving their own comments. --CBD 21:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)