User talk:

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

February 2010[edit]


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 British thermal unit, 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: British thermal unit was changed by (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2010-02-15T12:11:19+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 12:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

March 2010[edit]

Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Matrix calculus. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Please note that Wikipedia administrators can block editors who engage in vandalism and other disruptive behavior. Thank you. Immunize (talk) 14:58, 18 March 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.

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is the final warning you are receiving regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Dlohcierekim 16:18, 18 March 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.

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for Like you saw this coming, right?. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Dlohcierekim 16:25, 18 March 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.
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribscreation logchange block settingsunblockfilter log)

Request reason:

I was blocked for Like you saw this coming, right? You guys are so braindead that you're entering the scale from the other side.

Decline reason:

Your edits to the page quite clearly show you knew what you were doing. You knew you would be blocked for repeatedly blanking the page after warnings, your not going to get an unblock by gaming the system that the block message was wrong. Taelus (talk) 17:13, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

This was removed[edit]

If you made a constructive edit that was reverted by mistake, the thing to do would have been to 1) contact the reverter on his talk page, 2) Say the revert was made in error on your talk page, 3) discuss the matter on the talk page. You might even have reverted in turn with the edit summary-- "Revert of my edit was made in error. Please discuss before reverting again." One of the things not to do s to blank the bloody page 3 times in a row while engaging in dialogue in the edit summary. Dlohcierekim 16:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

And your smart remarks and personal attacks are only deepening the hole. I will gladly unblock you, but if you make a fool of me, I will reblock. Take on the advice from the last post. Thanks, Dlohcierekim 16:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

On second thought, you were blocked for removing content, despite being warned. Your unconstructive unblock request troubles me. I need some reassurance from you that you will stop that. Dlohcierekim 16:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore:this edit, this edit, this edit, this edit (I see the fake ref), all lead me to doubt you intend to edit constructively. Thanks Dlohcierekim 16:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I guess we reached a deadlock situation here, Mike Reichold. I guess I'll wait until the block will be released and try to reason about A having to be a square matrix afterwards. Any estimate how long my IP will blocked?

I have posted a review request at WP:An/I. There is reasonable doubt on the one edit. The rest look unconstructive. I still have not seen what I need, some assurance that you have good intentions, it was all a misunderstanding, and you will only edit constructively if unblocked. So it will have to be someone else for now. Dlohcierekim 16:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 :{I will not engage in the sort of incivility that peppers your edit summaries. Suffice it to say one of he reviewing admins did think of it.Good day. Dlohcierekim 16:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)