User talk:129.171.233.78

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

May 2009[edit]

Dear Sir;

I am posting here because you have not activated an e-mail link in your Wiki user profile.

I am writing regarding your recent edit of my description of Tom Clancy's brief rise in notoriety after the 9/11 attacks, and because I believe that we are both fans of Mr. Clancy's work.

I wrote:

"In his 1994 novel Debt of Honor, Clancy writes of an attack on the U.S. Capitol building by a Japanese terrorist - a catastrophy that, through succession, promotes protagonist Jack Ryan to the U.S. Presidency. Seven years later, in reality, "Islamic" terrorists launch just such an attack against major U.S. targets using the same weapon - U.S. jet airliners."

You re-edited my statement, adding more details which I perceive to be in defense of Mr. Clancy. I find this ironic, since the original purpose of my adding the "9/11" section was not to accuse or attack Mr. Clancy. I wrote it to document:

1. The fact that Mr. Clancy was indeed involved in a controversy involving his novel during 9/11.

2. To explore the underlying question of that controversy -

  "why didn't authorities prevent the attack after it had been previously dramatized in popular media?"

3. To suggest that the press suddenly and vindictively lost interest in Mr. Clancy once he started criticizing the news media.

Why doesn't my "9/11" section currently convey any defense of Mr. Clancy? Because it has gradually been re-edited to the point that the original thesis is un-recognizable. And, because to directly defend, attack, praise or accuse someone in a biography is bad academic form.

I believe if you had had the opportunity to read the original then you would have settled for simply changing the term "U.S. jetliners" to just "jetliners". "Debt of Honor" has an empty plane, 9/11 had four planes loaded with passengers. "Debt of Honor" was a Japanese airliner and 9/11 was U.S. airliners. It doesn't matter. It is the same horrific concept of terror. "Debt of Honor" is just "9/11-light". Mr. Clancy was not responsible for it, but he did write about it.

You also deleted my reference to the movie "Black Sunday", stating that it was irrelevent. It was irrelevent when you read the article, because the entire section had previously been gutted by another editor, leaving the "irrelevent" paragraph without context. Here is the original "9/11" section circa May 5th, 2009 -

The 9/11 Attack

In his 1994 novel "Debt of Honor", Clancy writes of an attack on the U.S. Capitol building by Japanese terrorists - a catastrophy that, through succession, promotes protagonist Jack Ryan to the U.S. Presidency. Seven years later, in reality, "Islamic" terrorists launch just such an attack against major U.S. targets using the same weapon - U.S. jet airliners.

Clancy's prophetic plot is not lost on the news media. On the tense afternoon of September 11th, 2001, Mr. Clancy is interviewed by Judy Woodruff on CNN[8]. Among other observations during this interview, Mr. Clancy criticises the new media's treatment of the U.S. intelligence community. Mr. Clancy appeared again on that fateful day, this time on PBS's Charlie Rose [9], where he debated Vice-Presidential candidate Senator John Edwards. News media interest in Clancy and his novel then seemed to evaporate, until his September 21, 2001, O'Reilly Factor interview on Fox News.

In 1977 the motion picture "Black Sunday" (a veiled reference to the infamous Palestinian terrorist group Black September) dramatized a similar terrorist attack against the United States using a hovering blimp to attack a crowded football stadium.

Freedom of speech and creative expression in Western society bears the inherent risk that enemies of that society may use this uncontrolled knowledge against it. In another quote from his The O'Reilly Factor interview, regarding the publication of his "Debt of Honor" Mr. Clancy states:

"Bill, that's the price you pay for living in a free society, as we have today. If you want to go be like the Soviet Union, where it was illegal, for example, to take a photograph of a train station, just -- you know, you can restrict our civil liberties that far, but you end up being like the Soviet Union was, and that was a failure."

So while it is likely that many enemies of Western society were educated in the West or have heavy exposure to Western popular culture [reference to the biography of Kim Jong-il], it is unproven whether the publication of Mr. Clancy's novel "Debt of Honor" or news media coverage of the U.S. Intelligence community contributed to the the success of the 9/11 attacks.

Other Tom Clancy novels involve plots with terrorists triggering a nuclear device at the Super Bowl in Colorado Sum of All Fears (1991) and teams of armed terrorists assaulting crowded U.S. shopping malls with automatic weaponsTeeth of the Tiger (2003).

The paragraph regarding "Black Sunday" was a clear example of where other writers like Thomas Harris had made similar "suggestions" before Tom Clancy had even started writing. So, even if popular fiction writers have given "ideas" to terrorists, Clancy was certainly not the first one. In an academic, reasoned way, I was defending Mr. Clancy.

"But who suggested that Clancy was providing a guide-map for terrorists in the first place?" you may ask. The press was not interviewing him on 9/11 because they suspected that he was a prophet. Underlying the sudden controversy surrounding Clancy and his "Debt of Honor" was the lingering question "Did the novel or ones like it show how it could be done?". And who was brave enough to ask the question? Bill O'Reilly:

"It is so close to what really happened. And my question in my mind was, if Tom Clancy can write about this and put forth a very plausible scenario, and I know all the intelligence guys in the United States read your books, why weren't they more -- why wasn't there more urgency to make it more difficult to do what happened?"

The sub-text here is - If Clancy and other fiction writers warned the good guys, didn't they also advise the bad guys too? Clancy's sensible answer to O'Reilly's question is quoted above but was removed from my writing.

I do not want to re-edit your work without consulting you first. I am going to try to negociate with the other editor to restore my work to some semblance of its former meaning.

                    Respectfully yours,
                    Vosperdw (talk) 05:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


P.S.

I also wrote/edited later in the TC article:

"Debt of Honor (1994) In this prophetic novel, a secret cabal of extreme nationalists gains control of Japan (having acquired some nuclear weapons), and start a war with the U.S. Ryan, now National Security Advisor, and Clark and Chavez, agents in Japan, help win the war. The Vice President resigns in a scandal, and the President appoints Ryan to replace him. A vengeful, die-hard Japanese airline pilot then crashes a jetliner into the U.S. Capital during a joint session of Congress attended by most senior U.S. government leaders, including the President. Ryan thus becomes the new President through succession."

January 2008[edit]

Information.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Scottsdale, Arizona, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Scottsdale, Arizona was changed by 129.171.233.78 (c) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-01-13T01:53:07+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 01:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

April 2008[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Samantha, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Clueless (talk) 10:47, 24 April 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.

September 2008[edit]

Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Ryan Seacrest. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

November 2008[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Tool has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. J.delanoygabsadds 23:49, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

December 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Florida Mental Health Act has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\bwordpress\.com' . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 00:35, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Warcraft (series) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 04:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

April 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Baltimore Mariners has been reverted.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b (links: http://www.fthemariners.blogspot.com/). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 02:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Baltimore Mariners has been reverted.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b (links: http://www.fthemariners.blogspot.com/). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 01:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

September 2009[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Tromsø has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Jeffrey Mall (talkcontribs) - 18:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

February 2010[edit]

Information.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Gavin DeGraw, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

  • Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
  • Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
  • The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Gavin DeGraw was changed by 129.171.233.78 (u) (t) making a minor change adding "!!!" on 2010-02-07T17:45:38+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Langerado. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Your removal of valid and properly referenced information, combined with the addition of unverified and semi-promotional text, topped by an unverified claim about a living person that is possibly libelous, constitutes vandalism--the wilful disregard of Wikipedia policy. Drmies (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2010 (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.

Your recent edits[edit]

Information.svg Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button Button sig.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Your edits on Langerado[edit]

I have started a thread on the Administrators' Notice board. You may weigh in at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_editor:_BLP_violation.2C_removal_of_references.2C_violation_of_WP:OWN. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

May 2010[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Artur Boruc, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. William Avery (talk) 09:39, 6 May 2010 (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.

April 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Tandon Doss, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. GFOLEY FOUR— 18:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

November 2011[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Dasani, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. WJetChao (talk) 05:22, 12 November 2011 (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.

July 2012[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from National Collegiate Athletic Association with this edit. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 01:39, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

September 2012[edit]

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to 2001 NBA Draft, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 08:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Illmatic. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 1966batfan (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Your edits to Malic acid[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Pseudomonas. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Malic acid, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Pseudomonas(talk) 23:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm A.amitkumar. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Malic acid, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  A m i t  웃   19:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)