User talk:Materialscientist

Please leave your message at the bottom of this page. I shall reply wherever you prefer (my usual habit is to reply here if the answer is short). If I replied on your talk page it means I am watching it, and there is no need to add {{talkback}} template or quote the previous message.

IP 65.95.58.252

After you blocked the user, s/he posted more abuse against Haim Saban on their own user talk page (see here). The user was blocked for BLP violations at the Haim Saban article. Can he be blocked from editing all pages, even his own talk page? — Fly by Night (talk) 23:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Materialscientist (talk) 23:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! — Fly by Night (talk) 00:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Airbus A340-200

Hello, I am back after a few month's block, which I think is unfair. I hope that all shameless people in this community in the past are no longer shameless. I would like to tell you that my spirit of standing up for truth will never die despite how people press on the spread of truth.

I still believe that the typical 3-class seating capacity for Airbus A340-200 can either be 239 or 261. The 239 version flies a longer range while the 261 verson flies a shorter range. In fact, other than the information that I had provided (although unreasonably denied) can support this truth, the paragraphs about the table can also prove this. If you do not believe, you can take a look at the paragraph "A340-200" in the section "Variants".

Last but not least, I would also like to let you know that my purpose of opening new accounts in the past was not for damaging Wikipedia, but I just wanted to let all of you know that I thought I was blocked unreasonably. I hope you all should know that truth fears no trial. The greatest friend of truth is time, her greatest enemy is prejudice, and her constant companion humility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scania N113 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not about truth, not about what we know or what we believe, but about summarizing notable information supported by reliable sources. Frankly, I see that battle of numbers as a waste of your editing abilities (there is so much to write about). Materialscientist (talk) 12:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you for appreciating my editing abilities. Yes, you are right. Of course what you and I know or what you and I believe may not be correct. However, if Wikipedia is not about truth, why do so many people depend on it? Truth is exactly what you call the "notable information supported by reliable sources". To find out all the truths, people need to find reliable sources first. If you say that Wikipedia is not about truth, does that mean that you do not want real things to be known by the world? If the paragraph "A340-200" in the section "Variants" says that there is a typical seating of 239, then why do you (I mean all of you) said that I was vandalising when I was trying to correct the information in the table? Scania N113 (talk) 13:42, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you not replying? Is it because you finally find out that I am right? Scania N113 (talk) 03:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More chemical names

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 August 14#Trichloroazane

You might like to quickly pop by. Uncle G (talk) 23:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Uncle G (talk) 13:37, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation

I just went through your UserPage and must say that the photographs there are indeed beautiful and attractive. I have the following thoughts about your recent comments on My Talk of myself. You must appreciate that I am a professed thinker, who writes for promotion of education not for any personal gain, except that i feel gratified if i get some critical comments from the readers. I do not think that can be termed as a selfish behavior. The edits in question just added a link to my recent article, whose subject though very relevant for the subject of the wiki article cannot be included in the article itself. A link to the article can be useful to the reader and does not imply as an edit for profit. I have been participating in Wikipedia for last six years and believe that I have sufficiently matured, perhaps a bit more then some impulse admins here. Cheers!! Hallenrm (talk) 09:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I might understand your philosophy and believe you mean only good, but while editing wikipedia we have to follow its rules and policies. In general, essays are not allowed, but there are areas where the are welcome, for example wikipedia policy pages themselves. You can think about trying to contribute there :-) Materialscientist (talk) 09:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please point me to the page, where it is stated that " In general, essays are not allowed,". I tried but could not find it!

ANI

I've brought this ip hopper issue to ANI here: [[1]]. If you could make a few range blocks, I have all the info you need there, as well as on User talk:Zzuuzz. Thanks MS, Tommy! [message] 09:29, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

read this

[2] this may help you overcome your sins... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qualities108 (talk • contribs) 11:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For defending my talk page earlier! Tyrol5 [Talk] 13:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK expansion

I started a slow but significant expansion recently. Do they make exceptions for slowpokes? For me to expand an article with what I feel is quality takes time. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 01:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this article doesn't qualify because it does not meet the required 5x expansion by prose (quotes do not count) within a reasonable time of 5-8 days. There is a significant backlog at DYK and thus time/length rules are enforced. I usually expand offline when thinking to submit to DYK, but this has drawbacks (someone can alter the article while I do that). Materialscientist (talk) 01:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. In an ideal WP I wish there existed an equal incentive to clean-up/rewrite articles, even if they are short, to encourage big quality improvements. -Shootbamboo (talk) 02:30, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

The user/ip 62.239.159.5 vandalised Terry Wogan,I noticed on the users talk page you previously gave him a block for vandalism,it appears the block is finished,I strongly suggest that the IP is given an indefinite block as it is obvious that this user will continue.Thanks.Sheodred (talk) 02:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This IP brings mixed contributions and has no recent warnings - can't block them right away, even for a short term. Materialscientist (talk) 05:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry

Hellow Material Scientist. Sorry for my rudeness. I just came here to apologise. It won't happen again. We can do crazy things when we're drunk ... Anyway, I'm better learning the Wikiepdia policies. I'm trying my best but it's tough at first for a newcomer. But I'll definitely stay away from the beers ... (at least when I'm near the reference desk :) Can I ask you if I need help? Thanks Material Scientist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.72.218.253 (talk) 06:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Materialscientist (talk) 07:18, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'm not a sockpuppet. Actually, my IP changes quite frequently (nearly every few hours) without me doing anything ... It's kinda strange. Maybe it's because I have wireless internet ... But anyway, I won't be attack others anymore. As I said, I was drunk. So the blocks you administered didn't serve any purpose lol cause some other wireless dude will probably pick up those blocks. My IP has changed since then. Anyway, I won't be doing any harm. Peace Dude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.20.4.217 (talk) 08:30, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As proof that my IP changes, it's me again with a different IP only a few seconds later ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.20.1.146 (talk) 08:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Register an account, and just stop hopping IPs. It's really quite apparent that your IPs are all you, the same user - no need for further "proof" of your IP changing. Sock puppetry is quite frowned upon, "fellas"... Doc9871 (talk) 08:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sockpuppeting. I'm not delibrately hopping IP's. It changes automatically. I can't do anything about it. I think it's something called Dymanic IP's in the computer world. Why can't I remain anonymous IP? I don't wanna create an account and you canna make me hahahaha. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.20.41.17 (talk • contribs)

redirect

I commented here: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_August_14#Trichloroazane as did you but I added new information that I expect would make you want to modify your position. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 06:30, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. There is no consensus to delete it anyway, thus I would leave things as they are, unless the balance shift suddenly to delete. Materialscientist (talk) 06:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maths refdesk

Hi, I'm the person who alerted the administrators' noticeboard for incidents regarding the vandalism on the mathematics reference desk. I just received a message on my own talk page from the vandal. It appears to be a threat of continued vandalism, but in such a way that he pretends to be remorseful so as to avoid punitive action against him. He has already shown to have means of changing his IP address, so this is not an empty threat. Can you do anything about it? Are you able to block all his IPs?--220.253.222.146 (talk) 11:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That person promised to behave, thus let us wait and see. Going into war is the last resort. Materialscientist (talk) 11:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I've changed IP's more than 50 times today. God knows how many times I've changed my IP. I've just been blocked again. But I changed my IP in 5 seconds. It's as simple as that. You're best bet is to get on my good books cause your admins (several of them) are fighting a losing battle against me. If you're decent, like I was when I was insulted and abused several times on the reference desk, then maybe I'll be nice as well. I'm not trying to vandalise. You're a dobber mate. And I hate dobbers ya know that? So apologise to me and maybe ya'll get a let of.

Hahaha You thought the bulltwang above was true didn't you. Na mate, I'm not a vandal. I was just a bit drunk and so I vandalised. I'm not a bad guy in real life IDK, so ya don't need to fear me. Just remove this message and we'll pretend it never happened. Got you again mate na? Hahaha you'll believe everything. Na mate I'm not gonna vandalise. That's my final word. Or maybe I'll ... Na mate hahahahhahahha got you again didn't I. You're as gullabla as my sainted aunt. Hahahah. Na you can bet you're momma's fine china that I'll not vandalise. Material Scientist dude is right, you don't wanna get into a war with me ... Hahaha got ya again na mate!? Yeah, you're gullable.

DOn't worry I'm not a vandal. Just you're normal guy who jokes with his mates and gets drunk one more time than usual ... Yeah apart from my drinking problem, I'm a nice dude. Your off the hooka this time, but be warned mate, dobbers dont go far in life. You'd best get on my good books and stop dobbing. I'll be keeping a eye on ya mate. ~~220.253.222.146 (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)~~ This post is by the vandal 114.72.202.2, trying to impersonate 220.253.222.146. Clarification by Meni Rosenfeld. [reply]

editor appears to be editing while drunk, probably should keep an eye on him, 114.72 im going to have to breathalyse you, breath into this tube.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'll layer offafa the booooooooozeeeeeeeeee. Leanoard. Do ya wanna beara? 220.253.222.146 (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now I'm being impersonated. If that's not grounds for blocking this user, what is?--220.253.222.146 (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~by the way the comment above 220's is not by him its by our drunk vandal, please unblock 220. --Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)~~ already unblocked as i responded, and 114 my user name is not leonard its lerd--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha I do the crime, you do the time. Wikipedia's a REALLY comical place ya know. BTW< in case it wasn't obvious I"m back and am as hungry as eever for my revenge on THE MODERATORS! Hahaha. You guys are fighting a losing battle so it's best to give up know!

110 is still posting offensive messages its seems, block him as well--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:10, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice how is IP usually starts with 110.20. ? Is it possible to block the entire range of IPs 110.20.xxx.xxx ?--Alphador (talk) 13:42, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also 114.72... David Biddulph (talk) 13:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How are you able to change your IP?--Wikinv (talk) 13:47, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki he said during his drunkern ramblings that he was using a laptop, maybe the bar has laptops--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is still at it. Please consider a range block.

Here's a sample of the IPs he uses: 110.20.41, 110.20.11, 110.20.34. This strongly suggests that he uses the IP block 110.72.191-255.*-- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 08:37, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And now there's this. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I voice my opinion. You're a dobber Rosenfeld. Stop dobbing and get a life. I'm not attacking anyone. I'm just speaking my opinion. If I can't speak my opinion, then what can I do?

Hey, there.

I just wanted to let you know that I signed for you here since you forgot. If you want to replace it with the actual signature, go ahead and do it. =) - Donald Duck (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]