User talk:Mr. Carbunkle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page User:I am eclipsed, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see
If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so on Wikipedia:Sandbox rather than in articles.
If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
- Policy on neutral point of view
- Guideline on external links
- Guideline on conflict of interest
I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! NASCAR Fan24(radio me!) 21:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
- It's okay to do anything with your account except vandalise, be a sockpuppet, or otherwise disrupt Wikipedia. Updating WP:BANNED, for instance, is fine. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 12:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
Self-blocking
I think I need the do the same sometimes. Although it is against policy, this is a handy little tool called the wikibreak enforcer (which will simply log you off if you log in with it). Try that and I hope not to see you editing! -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I wouldn't dare block you, especially after you've gone and buttered up Jimbo. How am I going to compete with that? =) -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Although I do have to add that this is probably one of the funniest things I've ever seen. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, Wikipedia:Rouge admin is a part of Category:Wikipedia humor (which I hope clears it up). Honestly, I wouldn't know (or have I just been sworn to secrecy?). There is still the Rouge-o-meter although I tend to deal more with the fun of The Wrong Version. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
-
WP:ROUGE
What, in god's name, does that mean? Mr. Carbunkle 00:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Where have you found that evil stuff ;) Was it here? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 00:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
The Rouge song
- We're evil and we're arrogant
- And vicious and conniving and like to rant
- Which is why the folks 'round here call us ROUGE
- We're part of the supeer-yur race
- Don't concurr, we'll slap you in your face
- We don't like no as the answer
- I know best, 'cause I'm administrator
- And if you want to give the truth
- That's fine by me. Oh yeah,
- But if it can't be sourced at all
- I-DONT-CARE-IF-IT'S-TRUE
- It's gone
- We like policy
- S'long as it follows common sense
- We know we're the best
- Our RfA will tell you all the rest
- And if there is an article
- That everyone wants kept
- But it's not notable or sourced at all
- WHAT'S-THIS-WORD-WE-CALL
- Concensus?
- We're not the rogues they say we are
- We just use common sense
- And if you don'like our viewpoint
- BUDDY-THAT'S-TOO-BAD
- Cause I'm rouge
Mr. Carbunkle 01:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nice one mate. I really like it. Enjoy. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 01:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Whenever I think of rouge admins, for some reason, your name's the first to come to mind. Mr. Carbunkle 01:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- My pleasure. Is it horrible? Do you want me to know about your reason? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 01:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Whenever I think of rouge admins, for some reason, your name's the first to come to mind. Mr. Carbunkle 01:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Nice one mate. I really like it. Enjoy. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 01:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Hmm? What are you saying? I like rouge admins. The encyclopedia is made better with them going around, deleting stuff against consensus because it violates policy and ignoring every rule that conflicts with their opinions. I aspire to be one someday, if I become a sysop. Mr. Carbunkle 03:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- My reason is that I saw your name, looked at the categories, and saw rouge admin and wanted to see what it is. Mr. Carbunkle 03:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- so now you found out about "what it is" and would like to delete stuff against consensus because it violates policy and ignoring every rule that conflicts with your opinions? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 03:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- My reason is that I saw your name, looked at the categories, and saw rouge admin and wanted to see what it is. Mr. Carbunkle 03:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- You DO know it's only a humorous joke, right? I'd never ignore consensus or go against policy for those things.
- ... or do I? Mr. Carbunkle 03:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- I can't tell Mr. Carbunkle since i don't know you. Maybe after a couple of months and some contributions i'd have a clear idea. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 03:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
Indefinite block
Per WP:SOCK and WP:DUCK. DurovaCharge! 14:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Excuse the use of profanity, but what the fuck took you so long?! No new editor shows up on Wikipedia, edits User:I am eclipsed's userpage first thing with a
tag, has contributed heavily to WP:BANNED and WP:MISS right from the get-go, and has a full understanding of policy and immediate knowledge of rouge admins. Good god, you people! Proabivouac was right, you people are so easily fooled.
-
- ...though apparantly not stupid. Mr. Carbunkle 21:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

