User talk:Thonos

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent edits, such as the ones to the page Rectal pain, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the "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.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! 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! Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it not acceptable?--Thonos (talk) 22:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

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 Rectal pain, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

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 NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, 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: Rectal pain was changed by Thonos (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.87982 on 2011-05-14T22:26:22+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Frank Ellis (Leeds University lecturer)

The article Frank Ellis (Leeds University lecturer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

"If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them" (WP:BLP1E).

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 16:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ... discospinster _talk 17:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is this?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Thonos (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Is this because I added the N-word into the article sumary? It was a mistake, I didn't want anyone to see it publicly. And why did you delete the whole article???--Thonos (talk) 01:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I have looked at every one of your edits, and only one of them could, as far as I can see, possibly be described as "vandalism", so "persistent vandalism" does not seem a reasonable description of your editing. I don't know how that edit summary came about as a "mistake", but an indefinite block for one out-of character edit seems excessive, so I will reduce the length of your block to 48 hours from when you were blocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since I wrote the above, my judgement has been questioned as you added "brutal anal sex" three times to the article on rectal pain. I have given you the benefit of the doubt there, and assumed that you were editing in good faith, even though the edits did not seem helpful. However, I should warn you that such benefit of the doubt may be less likely if any similar editing occurs. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't vandalism, you can google it that brutal anal sex may be one of the causes of rectal pain. It was blocked by a bot and i'll turn it back as soon as I'm unblocked, this time with a source. --Thonos (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]