User talk:203.87.202.142

Hi, the recent edit you made to History of the Philippines (1521–1898) 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 – Gurch 07:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

February 2008

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 Figure of speech, 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: Figure of speech was changed by 203.87.202.142 (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-02-19T03:44:23+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 03:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edit to List of Philippine Endangered Species (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. If you made an edit that removed a large amount of content, try doing smaller edits instead. Thanks! // VoABot II (talk) 03:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

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 List of Philippine Endangered Species, 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: List of Philippine Endangered Species was changed by 203.87.202.142 (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-02-26T03:54:07+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 03:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Iloilo City worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Finngall ^talk 16:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Personalized medicine do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that 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: '\bwebspawner\.com' (link(s): http://www.webspawner.com/users/iacspm/index.html) . 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 thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators 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).

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) 02:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

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

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Personalized medicine. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. Nestorius (talk) 03:25, 5 April 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 stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Personalized medicine, you will be blocked from editing. Nestorius (talk) 03:34, 5 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.

Hi, the recent edit you made to Michelin 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. Prashanthns (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

June 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page December 2007 in science do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that 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 thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators 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).

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) 00:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

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

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as the one you made to Koreans. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing.  S3000  ☎ 12:11, 14 June 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.

August 2008

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Type 61. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to blocking of editing privileges. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. MythSearcher^talk 16:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Miss International 2008, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well potentially being penalized by search engines. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 13:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Miss World 2008, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well potentially being penalized by search engines. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 13:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for spamming links to external sites. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so when the block expires. If you feel this block is unjustified, you may contest it by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 13:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Mitsubishi ATD-X has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. 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. Thank you. Rror (talk) 12:14, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Mitsubishi ATD-X. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. xedaf (talk) 12:14, 7 September 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.

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your test on Kristi Yamaguchi worked, and has been removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. - Unpopular Opinion (talk) 06:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

December 2008

Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:American Biographical Institute for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to use talk pages such as Talk:American Biographical Institute for inappropriate discussion, you may be blocked. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I thought I edited something that can contribute to the betterment of the page. If it is still not agreeable on your side , that's ok Amatulic. Others can make the judgement for that will be open for reading, not only you. Of course, one needs to make references/examples before one comes to a conclusion that the ABI is not a certificate mill. It's stupid to make a conclusion without supporting statements.

You made no constructive suggestions, and pointed out nothing specific (a sentence or paragraph) that was in need of correction. All you did was write about your personal experiences and write general, nonspecific complaints. None of that contributes to improving the article. If you do have any suggestions on what, specifically, you would like to see changed, then you are welcome to propose them on the talk page, or even edit the article yourself. If you do edit the article, please be sure not to remove anything that has references to sources. Thanks. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I already said it's ok Amatulic. You donot have to reiterate what your decisions are. Let the others make the judgement. I need to know what their worldwide comments are especially for those who are recipients. I even read your contribution to the article and it is direct to the point. As if you are making a universal conclusion that ABI is a certificate mill. Others may not agree with you. If you can re construct your statement there the better. One example is the article of David Vernon. Here it is: http://web.mac.com/david.vernon/The_Canberra_Journal/The_Scribbles/Entries/2007/8/21_David_Vernon_%E2%80%94_Man_of_the_Year!.html. It talks about vanity, greediness etc.. but it all depends in you as "being human" whether you need to receive the award or not and say plaudits to ABI or be happy for that year and the years to come. In fact this Vernon piece is worth a Pulitzer. It's philosophically brilliant! Is there any exemption in this "human being definition" per D. Vernon? Tell me. In fact, the vanity of wikipedia editors (like you) can already be felt unconscious on their(your) part while the other party is suffering from hypertension because of such stresses. If there are health related reasons done by editors of Wikipedia to their clients this has to be voiced out worldwide through the net. Better Quality Management has to be practised! Your posted warning images are terrifyingand demeaning. How about your being a Croatian- Singaporean-German? Does that exempt you! You ought not receive the benefits of the discoveries that ABI awardees are given plus your flock as well as your future generation. Wikipedia must establish a quality control management in dealing with clients that includes the younger generation and the adults. It seems that this wikipedia bruhaha is only for warring girls and boys! It has no right trail to follow and no ethics to observe. Automatically "here is for you... you idiot" thing. We are not learning anything here when it comes to ethical values. Instead of making the insult and all your surprising "stupid gimmicks" why don't you help in editing the text... if you are really capable of doing it. That solves the problem. Why talk, talk, talk and here's for you! As change is the motto of the new President of the USA, I wish that he will look into this problem as Wikipedia is US based. The US is very much concerned about Human Rights and Values World wide, Wikipedia through her editors is not. I think its time to change the President of Wikipedia... an honorable black one will be good. But the outgoing has to be audited for the millions and for human rights violations due to mismanagement of Wikipedia. These are SOPs, isn't it? I hope that the part of the donation which is now in millions that Wikipedia has received will be devoted to changing your rules and infrastructure so both parties will have harmony and better quality management not the warring kind. Who are you by the way? Are your genes perfect?

Amatulic are you sending me new messages? How come that when I open the discussion page of ABI there is this post that says I have a new message! What are you trying to insinuate. I cannot find one here. Are you playing bad games with me? You editors, you are already of age and you know what respect is . I think you can also be tried in courts by all your clients that you have terribly insulted. I don't think the "customer is always right" is working here. Harassment has started in the US as a law and other countries have adapted it. Don't tell me that Wikipedia editors are exempted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.202.142 (talk)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as in User talk:203.87.202.142, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 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. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 11:08, 20 December 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.

Mr. Sanchez, I like you because you revealed your real identity. The wikipedia editors i encountered don't do that. That's why they are free to insult anyone they like... the wikipedia way! Because they are anonymous so they can do it. I think this will be one of the changes that Wikipedia will undertake! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.202.142 (talk)

I saw in TV in the USA a company that mentions about specific killer genes. Once thrown in public/crowd the individual that will be killed or be badly damaged is the individual where this specific killer gene was specifically tailored for and the rest of the people will not be affected. With all these advances in science in individual specific targeting, can we not reveal the names and true identity of these abusive anonymous wikipedia editors? I am sure it is always possible!

Why do you have to remain anonymous? How can you use that experience with Wikipedia in case you look for a job or apply at schools or go abroad. People will doubt about you. You may be loyal in your work but your employer is not sure of your credentials especially if he got information that you were once connected with the wikipedia business--e.g. he may think you are "biting" when his back is turned, etc. I think it is much better if intelligience agencies by governments like the USA, will penetrate the wikipedia internal system and identify people practising human rights violation and release their immigration histories for their identification and inform port of entries locally and abroad of their presence. They can even do collaborative work with child molesters internationally, how about these wikipedia editors practising harassments (this come in various forms). They need to be Tagged! Be considered as the Most Wanted in this category.

I just read the so many web sites condoning wikipedia even child pornography. I would suggest that someone will boldly create a web site where a list of Wikipedia editors who practised harassment online as well as violators of human rights will be made available worldwide. And for the faults done by Amatulic it must be graded to what extent did amatulic did that blunder but it does not exempt her to be included in the proposed web site. She has to be included there.

I hope that there will come a time that educational institutions, for most don't believe in the accuracy of the information as discussed in the internet and media worldwide or if there are verifiable ones, they are just duplicates of what were taken from outstanding newspapers as well governments worldwide will condone the immorality and the human rights violations of wikipedia so it will no longer function. Even sponsors of this "kind"(as decribed above) of wikipedia will also be charged... isn't it? It's just like sponsoring something illegal. Are they not aware that Wikipedia (this apply to almost all Wikipedia editors that I suppose are being encountered by anyone. I believe the victims have the same feelings as mine) are trespassing human values and rights. They donot have respect at all. "It's a chaotic lawless country."

Being shamed in the net for the worldwide audience carries a big penalty. There is no law that protects behavior. Is there one? Unlike genes. So harassment can come in here. It says there is no personal attack but look at what they are doing at the talk page I felt I am stoned. That is a personal attack! How about throwing stones at you just like what the other countries are doing to their criminals in public parks? This is no joke!

Instead of using the donations in providing a venue to create and support this type of "war", it could have been much better if the money was provided for the Victims of Katrina!

The knowledge derived from Wikipedia has to be verified by a university professor at least an expert and one still has to spend time going to library in order to complete it. So Wikipedia is not really serving its purpose. It gives fragmented information and it makes the person lazy rather than go to the library and make personal consultations with bonafide experts.

Who is amatulic?

Please give us information, who is amatulic ... Her real name and everything personal about her...We want to get to know her too.