User talk:DohgonCarbon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Dohgon University of Thought

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dohgon University of Thought, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.wonderwheelsresearch.com/index.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Circular Platform OS

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Circular Platform OS, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://dohgonuniversity.com. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] December 2007

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to User:CorenSearchBot. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Please use only talk pages for comments and questions. Thanks --Oxymoron83 16:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


[1]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. --Hu12 (talk) 16:16, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice

You appear not to be aware of this, but deleting someone's user page in order to make a comment is vandalism. If you want to communicate with someone, you should add a comment to their talk page without deleting anything. Also, please notice, as the notes above advise, that Wikipedia does not publish material that is copied from other sources, because this is a copyright violation. In your specific case, it would also be helpful to review the notability criteria, since your articles would have been deleted under that guideline even if they hadn't been deleted as copyright violations. Please understand that Wikipedia just isn't a forum for advertising yourself or your own ideas, and shouldn't be used for promotional purposes. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop

I have moved your comment to my user talk page. Please stop vandalizing my user page. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Final warning

My talk page is here. This is my user page, which I do not want you to edit. I've tried to be patient with you as a new user, but I've asked you clearly several times, and if you restore the message on my user page again, I will block you from editing. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)_ —Preceding comment was added at 16:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] [Regarding this edit]

Your editing is too disruptive, and not at all appropriate. I have blocked you for 31 hours, time to read some of Wikipedia's basic principles, like WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:N. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC) My sister I apologise because I click on the yellow bar to read my messages but I did not know where to put the reply, so I clicked on your name to write to you. I removed all the other things so what I wrote did not get lost in the jumble. Is this the right place now?

If I write the article in different words can I please put it back? The Dohgon University of Thought has an important message which we must share with the good people of the World. It is an ancient Wisdom of the AfrAkan Dohgon tribe. The University has been featured in many publications and interviews, and there are testimonials from the students who have excelled.

How do I be an administrator here so I too can delete pages I do not like?

I am now banned from editing. Why is this? I made a mistake! YOU DO NOT HAVE TO THROW ME OUT! PLEASE! I listened to the warning and I found your talk page and I typed the message above to you but then it said that I am banned from editing. WHY!! I do not mean to disrupt you or your work, I want to help to spread the knowledge.

I would be happy to answer your questions. You are not banned forever, but you are blocked for 31 hours. You are blocked because you need to understand Wikipedia's rules before you can edit, because what you're doing right now is damaging Wikipedia. I do not know whether or not you can create an article about the Dohgon University of Thought, because you haven't been able to communicate whether or not it is notable yet, but I do know that Wikipedia is a place for explaining what the most reliable sources agree is true, and not for spreading our own beliefs, however important they are to us. I too have beliefs that are important to me, and I write about them in my blog, but I don't add them to Wikipedia, because this isn't the right place for them. You can only become an administrator after many other users agree that you have proven that you understand the rules and can enforce them wisely, and after many months or years of useful editing. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I have read some of the policies, and I see you were right. I apologise again.

But you blocking me is unfair. Because I need to be warned, but the warnings were for not writing on the talk page, and I stopped after I was warned. I got blocked for adding to an article, but the 3RR rule says I can do it three times. I wouldn't do it again, but I still don't need to be blocked. I also found a policy about good faith, and you have not followed that one, Mrs FisherQueen, because I have not tried to cause trouble here. The block also came after the warnings but I hadn't made any bad editions after being warned, so you warned me then blocked me almost straight away. That's not fair.

Please unblock me.

PS This blocking thing is scary, it is like a judge handing a prison sentence.

Scary? Do you mean, scary like being someone who is not well educated and who has been diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, and who cannot tell the difference between the real doctors who give the information confirmed by real research, and a man who calls himself a 'university' and claims to be able to fix the uncurable disease? Scary like wasting your last months of mental clarity under the influence of a man who encourages you to stop taking the medicines that would extend your life, never knowing that the hope he offers is as fake as his credentials and will shorten the precious time you have left? Scary like paying him money for his false hope, never knowing that he's preying on your ignorance? Scary like that? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I do not like your implication. You are letting your personal prejudices of the Dohgon University of Thought cloud your judgment as an administrator. You are insulting my belief system, and I think it is because you are racist.
Through the spiritual technology of the AfrAkan Dohgon tribe, many truly miraculous results can be made, and to re-attune your spirit, which is Black, my sister, even if you call yourself white and nerdy, to the energy of the Infinite Dark Universe can reawaken neural pathways long lost to diseases caused by sin.
I object to your bigotry and prejudice. Brother John of the Dohgon University of Thought can help you too, if you are only willing to open your mind to new ways of thinking and close off your innate white prejudice. Brother John is not reprehensible. What is reprehensible is the Society for Creative Anachronism, which is European devils dressing up in the clothing of war to celebrate their culture which thirsts for blood.
You have much to learn, my sister. Please look at the website of the Dohgon University of Thought and see what spirituality lies within your reach. The University is also not just one man, but the Wisdom of the entire AfrAkan nation, and it is properly accredited with the authorities.
I forgive you for what you do, because you know no better. You cannot help being what you are, until you are awakened to the Truth.
Now please unblock me.

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: "I made mistakes but I read the policies now and I am a newcomer who was bitten by Mrs FisherQueen. Please?"

Decline reason: "Calling other editors racists and bigots is not a good way to be unblocked. Please use the time to read the guidelines for contributions to Wikipedia, paying special attention to the policy on original research. If you persist in attempting to reintroduce your proselytizing upon your return, you will certainly be blocked again— possibly indefinitely. — Coren (talk) 17:38, 22 December 2007 (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.

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: "FisherQueen, the administrative judge who blocked me, called me reprehensible human being on her talk user page, based on a website she doesn't even know if it is mine, so she is biased. She and Coren, the other administrator who declined my request, work in cahoots to ban people they don't like. See User talk:Gp75motorsports. I also used Google to look for FisherQueen and Coren on the same page on Wikipedia, and I found this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FisherQueen/Archive15#User:Coolmoose where they collaborate on whether to block or unblock some one. Also here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive336#User:Prester_John she was told she overstepped bounds as an administrator. I want this reviewed by an impartial judge please. All I did is make a mistake but because FisherQueen doesn't like what I believe she has power to stop me contributing."

Decline reason: "This is only a 31 hour block and will give you time to read up on Wikipedia policies which it seems to be apparent you need to do. Your edit was inappropriate and you seem to fail to recognize. Take time, as has been suggested, to read those particular policies so that you might understand why your actions have been inappropriate.— Metros (talk) 18:00, 22 December 2007 (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 admitted above that I was in the wrong, and I apologised. Then FisherQueen called me a reprehensible human being! If I come back I will edit the article in different words to the website I promise. And I will not proselytise. I apologise again! I'm learning now.

Now FisherQueen is here trying to cover up what she did http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Coren&diff=prev&oldid=179620819 but this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FisherQueen/Archive15#User:Coolmoose shows it is an act. She also gangs up on people with Metros, the other administrative judge who has now not unblocked me, you can see it in this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Metros/Article_8#electric_football and this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Prester_John#December_2007 where they gang up to enforce their own liberal agenda on people whose views they don't like (I don't like his views either from what I read of them, but he has the same right as anyone else does)}}

You know, I'm very active on Wikipedia. It won't be hard to find me working together with just about any active administrator somewhere. In fact, you could pick any two random admins who are reasonably active, and in general, you'll be able to find communication between them. It's proof that people who become admins tend to be active users who work well with other users, but it isn't really evidence of a conspiracy, unless you consider all cooperation to be conspiratorial. I'm afraid you're rather wasting your time digging up evidence that I'm an active participant who likes working with others, since at Wikipedia, that's generally considered to be a good thing. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:17, 22 December 2007 (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: "But I recognize it! And I have written the rest below to try to get this to work"

Decline reason: "for the reasons stated above. Repeatedly you have been warned and have chosen in pursuit of a certain point, to reject community input and consensus that your edits are disruptive. because you continue to excessivily request unblocking, which is disruptive and Tag abuse, your block has been extended (expiry time of 48 hours ). If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires.— Hu12 (talk) 18:21, 22 December 2007 (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.

Block extended due to sockpuppetry vandalism as User talk:DohgonWisdom and User talk:CarbonDohgon. Vsmith (talk) 16:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)