User talk:Erethendos

October 2017

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Nebraska. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 02:48, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

It is not personal analysis ... Unless you can prove to me that White Americans in Nebraska have French colonist ancestry.

Please re-read my paragraph; or better yet: re-word itl if you have to. If you can find me a citation/source that proves Nebraska has French heritage; then it is indeed personal analysis - and you CAN remove my paragraph ... I did not violate any Wikipedia policy. Sorry ! Erethendos (talk) 02:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 02:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Nebraska, you may be blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 03:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

We do not need to "find [you] a citation/source that proves Nebraska has French heritage". See WP:BURDEN. It is your responsibility to find citations to support the content you add, not our responsibility to supply citations that disprove your theories. Continue and you run the risk of being blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 03:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

You have everything all wrong. And since you apparently study Law or are interested in it - you would know that I am correct. It is not speculation. Can you prove that White Americans in Nebraska have French ancestry? Where is the source and citation - for the percentage? I don't need a source or citation.

I will not revert my edit; upon your wishes. But you should do think about it and know that you are in the wrong. I would hate to get banned over something so juvenile - very childish behavior on your part. If you want to ban and carelessly distress me, fine by me. Are you still there? Hint. I have other things to do, you know. -- Erethendos (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Until you've taken the time to actually read the policies I linked above, I strongly suggest you find "other things to do" that don't involve editing Wikipedia. If you have read them, and continue to violate them, then I will not hesitate to revert your edits and if necessary request that you be blocked. Your call. General Ization ^Talk 03:16, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

If you think there's a problem with content that already exists in the article, you should bring the issue up on the article's Talk page and discuss its removal and/or correction with other editors — not persistently add unsourced commentary of your own to the article that contradicts the existing content. That's not the way things work here. General Ization ^Talk 03:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, beside the point. Aren't you Jewish or Anglo-Saxon working for the Federal government and being payed to sit here? I have been editing Wikipedia far longer than you have - February 2005. My old account is no longer in use. And I do not remember it's password. But it seems you guys pushed for more security since I've been gone. Getting a little nervous, Wikipedia administration? Something you want to hide from people? Internet censorship and control? Oh ho ho. Likewise. -- Erethendos (talk) 03:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

And you may want to review WP:CIVIL. General Ization ^Talk 03:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

And WP:EW Meters (talk) 03:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Erethendos. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. I've replaced your personal attack with this warning. Meters (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Go right ahead. I have very low capacity for caring. Cause apparently I don't believe I have done anything wrong. If you want less people on Wikipedia, then fine by me. There is no need to stir up ridiculous drama. You people have done everything to me. -- Erethendos (talk) 23:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

And you continue to spam my Wiki talk page. Do you realize how embarrassing this is? And it makes me look bad. Okay - I was keeping it civil before. The sarcastic comments were only aimed at General Ization; since he thinks I don't know what I am doing or talking about. Is it ok to make a few mistakes? You just want to flood my page with all this controversial stuff? Why shouldn't you people be apologizing to me? Maybe it's your egos getting in the way? I don't know. Am I really that big of a burden? -- Erethendos (talk) 23:21, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian, as you did at User talk:Oshwah. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:17, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

I did not harass Oshwah ! I asked to be his friend. What is the big idea? -- Erethendos (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. —PaleoNeonate – 04:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You have been blocked for disruptive editing and harassment of other editors. Cease this behavior if you want to continue editing Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)