User talk:86.45.218.232

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

THE "STORM IN A TEACUP" AFFAIR

Contents

[edit] February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to January 2008 Chinese winter storms has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 02:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WOW! Its February here too! but don't redirect the page okay thanks :) Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 02:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
The page is about events in January. Not February. Create a new article if you want. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 02:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this event still happening? If it is you are indeed correct.....baby! :) Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 02:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
You are correct!!! You WIN!! Here is you prize!

No Cookie for you :) Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 03:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 02:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to January 2008 Chinese winter storms constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 02:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC))

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. The Evil Spartan (talk) 03:00, 2 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 do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:Anonymous Dissident. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 03:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Wait no I'm wrong you lose please stop before its too late baby! Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 03:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

You're redirecting to a empty/nonexistent article. Their Decision stands. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 03:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to January 2008 Chinese winter storms, you will be blocked from editing. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 03:06, 2 February 2008 (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.

[edit] Block

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for 24 hours. Please only contribute to Wikipedia positively in future; disruption to articles and harassment do not help your cause. Thank you. Harro5 03:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what you did was wrong. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 03:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit]  ?

  • Well gee, I'm sorry... you're hardly gonna block little old me who you told was right baby? :( Besides I was only hoping some fine baby like yourself might go about creating the article since ye all seem to care so much for Asia and its stormy weather and all... but well it seems you've blocked me... dunno why... I was being constructive... explaining my actions... it's February... the article says January only... now I feel hurt... nobody listening to little old me... might just go get my gun... --86.45.218.232 (talk) 03:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Suicide Isn't funny. I've had a friend who did once. It's not something to joke about. :( Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 03:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Wasn't jokin'... didn't mention suicide... my gun meant something else... ain't an actual weapon... they don't even sell guns freely around here... yet it's still February... and I still don't understand what I did wrong... I wasn't able to create the article... I was trying to point that out... instead I got blocked so I wasn't even able to protest... but the storms are ongoing and my point is lost.... --86.45.218.232 (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Well I've been accused of doing wrong because I tried to point out that this article's title is wrong - it says January, it is now February and the storms have now reached the main page, such it seems is their importance. So I tried to suggest a redirect to a title that included February and was told that I was wrong to do so. Then blocked. Why I ask?"

Decline reason: "You weren't "wrong to do so". You were wrong to just go ahead and do it without building some consensus on the article's talk page ... I note that not one of your edits was to that page. There is such a thing as being too bold, and when you do cross that line it's called disruptive editing. — Daniel Case (talk) 03:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

  • I'm ever so sorry Mr. Case...what can I do to make it up to you? I had a cookie earlier but that seems to have vanished now too. :( oh what is up with the world... --86.45.218.232 (talk) 03:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another

  • Well, I says to meself, might as well give it another go. Dunno what's gonna happen, doesn't seem that anyway understands what I'm trying to say. No one to offer me a decent explanation.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Doesn't anyone see the misunderstanding here? I didn't destroy a page, or delete it, or put in some crude remark. I tried to redirect it in a correct fashion. It is February. The storms are ongoing. The article has been propelled to the main page so therefore it must be important. I was trying to add what I belive is right to that importance. I wanted the article redirected. No one would do it for me. It's discrimination against those without user names! There is surely some equality issues here! I ain't trying to destroy wikipedia! I love it! I thought I was doing right and even if I made a genuine mistake (which I don't see how I have - it's February unless I'm losing my marbles!) I haven't set out to destroy everything in a manner that has seen me blocked! I tried to help! How can I be bold but then be punished for being genuine?"

Decline reason: "You received a number of warnings for vandalism, above, and did not cease with your disruption, thus you were blocked to prevent further disruption of the encyclopedia. You are welcome to make constructive edits once the block expires, with or without an account. — Rjd0060 (talk) 04:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.