User talk:TheRealDonMurphy

Welcome!

Hello, TheRealDonMurphy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Slander

What I do on my employers time? First, you don't know who I am and if you did it wouldn't matter much anyway. Secondly, I don't edit Wikipedia while I'm at work, and my employers would know if I did. If you ever knew who my employers were, and you attempted to claim I was "in a cult", that would be slander (unless you sent an email, then it would be libel...but I would assume you get the picture). As for the title of talk page section, I feel it's appropriate that you be given a title that best reflects your maturity. How mature can you ever claim to be if you're getting so pissed off at a bunch of teens (as I'm sure some of those editors you are trying to find out about are teens) that you open up a forum thread so you can insult them. It is a sad fact that you would even be bothered by a bunch of lolely Wikipedia editors so much that you would send your thirteen year old minions out into the cyber world to try and "find out who [we] are", and possibly any dirt on us, just so you can contact our employers and school (if any of us are in school) and let them know "what we do on their time". Maybe if you spent more time working on your own job, instead of worrying about how you can spread the word on our "cultist" ways, then maybe people would know who you are (as you claim most probably don't know...which, I have to admit, before your first little tantrem at the Transformers article, I didn't even know who you were and I know the careers of quite a few people in the film industry). Regardless, Wikipedia has policies, and everyone must obey them. You get reverted because you don't cite sources. Excuse me, you get reverted because we cannot verify what's in your head, as I assume your sources are typically yourself. We tend to have this problem with the professionals who's work we write about (Ted Newsom has a user account and he liked to insert things he knew were true, because he had done them, but couldn't show verifiable sources to back them up. He has since started to cite sources in his edits). So, we're all happy if you want to make articles more "accurate", but you need to remember that your brain is not a reliable sources because no one can verify what's in there...no matter how hard we try to cut into it. ;) (that's a joke). As for Jimbo, I could care less about that man. I'm all appreciative of what he's given society, and editors like myself that enjoy reading and contributing to the collective whole, but his personal actions whether against this place or in his personal life are none of my concern - and they shouldn't be yours either. You have a life of your own, do you not? Why do you care about Jimbo so much (and I see that many of your forum patrons care a bit too much as well). Has Jimbo done something to wrong you personally, or when your Ford Focus breaks down to you tend to blame Henry Ford for all your problems? (and no, I don't think you drive a Ford Focus, so please don't use this as an excuse to attempt to educate me on your vehicle of choice; it's an analogy). In closing, if you follow the rules you won't be bothered by the little "douches", "assholes", and "cultist" "baboons" (all your words) that frequent Wikipedia. If you choose not to, and it's your choice, then you'll just continue to be hounded over the same issues and you'll continue to get blocked by Administrators who have have no side in your battles and are only enforcing other rules.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

What I do on my employers time? First, you don't know who I am don't I? and if you did it wouldn't matter much anyway.we shall see Secondly, I don't edit Wikipedia while I'm at work, and my employers would know if I did.then you have nothing to worry about- why bother typing this screed? If you ever knew who my employers were, and you attempted to claim I was "in a cult", that would be slander (unless you sent an email, then it would be libel...but I would assume you get the picture). nonsense. This IS a cult- fits every definition. Slander and libel are FALSE. You ARE in a cultAs for the title of talk page section, I feel it's appropriate that you be given a title that best reflects your maturity.And I feel you need to be outed and exposed. So we both act on our feelings How mature can you ever claim to be I never claimed anything sirif you're getting so pissed off at a bunch of teens (as I'm sure some of those editors you are trying to find out about are teens)why are teens allowed to edit an article about me, a nobody and defame me? that you open up a forum thread so you can insult them.not insult- identify and name them It is a sad fact that you would even be bothered by a bunch of lolely Wikipedia editors so much that you would send your thirteen year old minions most Transformers fans grew up on the brand and are in their twenties and thirtiesout into the cyber world to try and "find out who [we] are", and possibly any dirt on us, just so you can contact our employers and school (if any of us are in school) and let them know "what we do on their time".no crime involved in liberating the truth Maybe if you spent more time working on your own job, I spend plenty of time working irinstead of worrying about how you can spread the word on our "cultist" ways, then maybe people would know who you are but the entire problem is I DON'T WANT TO BE WELL KNOWN YOU IGNORAMOUS(as you claim most probably don't know...which, I have to admit, before your first little tantrem at the Transformers article, I didn't even know who you were and I know the careers of quite a few people in the film industry). Regardless, Wikipedia has policies, and everyone must obey them. The Cult has policies and cultists must obey them- I am not one of themYou get reverted because you don't cite sources.I speak the truth- kneel before me Excuse me, you get reverted because we cannot verify what's in your head, as I assume your sources are typically yourself. We tend to have this problem with the professionals who'sword is "whose" work we write about (Ted Newsom has a user account and he liked to insert things he knew were true, because he had done them, but couldn't show verifiable sources to back them up. He has since started to cite sources in his edits). So, we're all happy if you want to make articles more "accurate", but you need to remember that your brain is not a reliable sources because no one can verify what's in there...no matter how hard we try to cut into it. ;) (that's a joke).I'll make you a deal- delete the Don Murphy article and I will go away and you and your cult can be safe again- that is all I ever wanted anyway. Your stupid Transformers film article has 30 mistakes if it has one As for Jimbo, I could care less about that man. I'm all appreciative of what he's given societyis it contagious? I mean ROTFLMFINGAO- an inaccurate site any moron can edit is a gift?, and editors like myself that enjoy reading and contributing to the collective whole,a-hole? but his personal actions whether against this place or in his personal life are none of my concernhis crimes against the cult don't interest you as a cultist? spoken like a true Manson Family Member - and they shouldn't be yours either.I will decide what concerns my life, Nole You have a life of your own, do you not? Why do you care about Jimbo so much (and I see that many of your forum patrons care a bit too much as well). Has Jimbo done something to wrong you personally, He is the leader of the cult that allows a highly ranked in the search article about me, a guy you just admitted is nobody, to be maintainedor when your Ford Focus breaks down to you tend to blame Henry Ford for all your problems? (and no, I don't think you drive a Ford Focus, so please don't use this as an excuse to attempt to educate me on your vehicle of choice; it's an analogy).Your analogy is as strong as your English In closing, if you follow the rules you won't be bothered by the little "douches", "assholes", and "cultist" "baboons" (all your words) that frequent Wikipedia. Please delete the Don Murphy article and I promise to go away and not reveal who you are- but will you, Coward? Will you?If you choose not to, and it's your choice, then you'll just continue to be hounded over the same issues and you'll continue to get blocked by Administrators who have have no side in your battles and are only enforcing other rules. Since the first two losers, HighinBc and PhilGronowski started this crap a year and a half ago I have been banned 114 times. Wikipediots have blocked the IP#s of Sony Pictures , Jim Henson Studios and the Walt Disney Company at various times. Just last week they blocked the IP# of one of the biggest resorts in Hawaii. In that time I have outed Fifteen of you cultists. Some like Steve have been dumb enough to come back for more. But this isn't a joke. This is Life.

Go ahead. Delete the article and I will go away forever. TheRealDonMurphy (talk) 07:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello again

Hi. What pissed me off the most last week was that I was 100% civil in the message I left you, explaining why you were reverted, asking you to consider how the edit looked from this side of things, explaining how our verifiability policy works, and admitting that we do sometimes get things wrong (and why). Your response seemed petulant, but I guess my subsequent "retirement" message was too, so I genuinely apologise for that. I don't know or care about your original beef with Wikipedia, but despite your statement of intent to "out" me to my employer (I've been my own boss for about a year now, but no matter), I'm willing to do what I can in the interests of the greater harmony, so if there's anything I can do to help restore your confidence in the place, please don't hesitate to contact me. I'm positive that any of the other editors you've had run-ins with would be happy to help put this feud to bed too. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 07:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

simplest request you ever had- ready- DELETE THE DON MURPHY ARTICLE and protect the page. Then I am gone, POOF. TheRealDonMurphy (talk) 07:47, 16 March 2008 (UTC)