User talk:Irtehprwn

Hello, Irtehprwn! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Your recent edits[edit]

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 12:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your question[edit]

Hi, I answered on my talkpage. Addition to that, you may want to seek contact with a wikiproject, see Wikipedia:WikiProject for a list. They may be able to help you further. Happy editing! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Show me the sources for these edits[edit]

You are a vandal who are you kidding?Shipseggsbasket (talk) 17:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How does that make me a vandal? you have NEVER provided an article with your own sources, only deleting them.

Show me the sources, and we both know that you are the biggest vandal in all of wikipedia and we both know what your agenda is and that you DELETE anything and CHANGE everything that doesn’t fit your agenda

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop spamming my discussion page with links please, by the way, can you explain where your sources come from? I have some changes were I didn't provide sources, yes, but you have only pages were you haven't provided sources, so I guess you're destroying more than I am.Irtehprwn (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha spam, haha SOME, haha who are you trying to fool 99,99999999999% of all your edits are without sources and you delete any source that does not fit your agenda and it is not spam it is absolute proof you your clear and pure forms of vandalism

And I can link all the times you have deleted sources but we both know that you would delete that as well and call it all spam, and you know why? Because you are the greatest vandal in all of wikipedia Shipseggsbasket (talk) 18:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The few articles which I haven't added sources to is most likely translated from another wikipedia. Irtehprwn (talk) 18:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The few, you mean the VAST majority 99,9999999999999% of all your edits like the one listed above the few haha, the real question is do you really believe what you say and you really believe that homemade internet pages that anyone can make are real sources.Shipseggsbasket (talk) 18:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that SMB, Populär historia, books written by Voltaire, Englund etc are made by some unknown person who have just written the books/made the webpages in somebody's/something else's names.

Irtehprwn (talk) 18:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, if you find my sources unreliable, why wouldn't you find sources like http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/h30-sw.htm unreliable? Irtehprwn (talk) 18:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha you believe your own false statements yes these pages are sooooooo professional hahaha so very professional haha they are all homemade and NOT in English, what is most interesting is that you delete REAL sources in ENGLISH and replace them with these false once haha the question as always is do you really believe your own false statements or is that just that you WANT to believe them

http://www.archipelago.nu/SKARGARD/SVENSKA/STOCKHOLM/saltsjo.htm

http://members.tripod.com/Bengt_Nilsson/Historia/poltava.htm

This is a real source in English that you delete because it does not fit your agenda, who are you joking you are a vandal the worst kind, the one with an agenda

http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/P/O/PoltavaBattleof.htm

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 18:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't make it more unreliable because It's in another language. Irtehprwn (talk) 18:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, they have sources supporting them, even if they are home made. Irtehprwn (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It makes it unreliable because you have an agend 99,999999999999% of all your edits have been minimizing Swedish casulties and maximizing those of the enemy and then you find some homemade page to back it up, it is not reliable or verifiable which is a recuiremnt for wikipedia and lots of sources for this edit yes so many sources oooooooooooo http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_L%C3%BCtzen_%281632%29&diff=156619495&oldid=151408514 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_L%C3%BCtzen_%281632%29&diff=202353271&oldid=202341256

You are a vandal and never forget that for one second not for a millionth of a second, the biggest vandal in all of Wikipedia, and the worst kind since you believe you own false statements and false numbers and false text

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 18:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're a Russian who denies the facts, SMB is the Swedish military library and you call that source unreliable? But sources which are homemade but in English, THEY are reliable, besides, you're the one who's harrassing me, calling me a vandal, so I think you're a bit desperate. Irtehprwn (talk) 19:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this source SMB

http://www.archipelago.nu/SKARGARD/SVENSKA/STOCKHOLM/saltsjo.htm

Or this? http://members.tripod.com/Bengt_Nilsson/Historia/poltava.htm

And let us not forget your million edits without any sources and where you delete sources like here

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 19:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I told you that because you showed me Lützen, which I had used SMB as a source for, the two sources you name are supported by Nationalencyklopedin, the National encyclopedia. Irtehprwn (talk) 19:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha you avoid answering the question talk about 99,99999% of your edits where you do not use any sources and just change the numbers because you wanted to like these edits talk about them

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 19:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop spamming you fool, what question by the way? Irtehprwn (talk) 19:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The question is the million edits you make without any sources and where you delete source because they do not fit your own agenda as the "spam" show you just made one 2 seconds ago have you forgotten, or do you just choose to ignore because you are the biggest vandal in all of wikipedia

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 19:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I told you, I have added sources afterwards for many of them, when that's not the case, I probably have translated it from a different wikipedia, as in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Stralsund_%281715%29&diff=202175842&oldid=202060616 Irtehprwn (talk) 19:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha many haha you change in a few 100 articles then you find some homemade page that fits your agenda to maybe one of them so that leaves 99 unreferenced and 1 with a false and unverifiable reference, you are a vandal the biggest vandal in all of wikipedia you change the numbers to fit your own agenda like you changed this number here

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Great_Northern_War&diff=156624101&oldid=154861543

No sources no nothing just personal agend, why? Because you are the greatest vandal in all of wikipedia and it proves that you have no interest of the truth just of what fits your own perverted agenda Shipseggsbasket (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No point debating with you, you aren't listening and if that isn't enough, you're also insulting me. Irtehprwn (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are unable to explain you changing of numbers like I have listed so you say it is no point because we both know you have your own personal agenda like the changing of numbers here

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Great_Northern_War&diff=156624101&oldid=154861543

and in 100s of other articles, this is such a pure form of vandalism and you cannot explain it, it is like having video tape of a crime and the person says I did not do it so why do you not explain your changing of the numbers unreferenced like they are Shipseggsbasket (talk) 19:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't begun to edit seriously in september last year, now be nice and explain this to me:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_L%C3%BCtzen_%281632%29&diff=202341256&oldid=202330587

Ohh really September that is why you keep on changing back to those numbers again and again and again and adding even more numbers and changing them again why don’t you first explain these edits

I won't since you can't explain yours, maybe I was a vandal who edited without sources, but I have edited and added sources, you on the other hand, haven't added any sources and you can't explain anything, so I won't let you keep going on the offensive because I have nothing to gain from explaining. Irtehprwn (talk) 19:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need to explain my reverting of your vandalism? HA! I have already explained it many times, you change the numbers which you pull out of your ass in 100 articles in 1 out of those 100you find a homemade page that fits your agenda, all your edits are pure vandalism which I have proven over and over and over again, and yes you can't explain you acts of vandalism since they ARE vandalism you are a vandal the worst kindShipseggsbasket (talk) 19:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have anything to say, because you're repeating the same things over and over again, you're restoring pages from a user named Nikits who is a vandal, you remove sources, you insult me, you don't have anything to say.

You remove sources, you change the numbers like I have linked do you have no memory I have linked a million times some of the times you have changed the numbers do you want me to link it again? And you are the one who insults me that you think that I will allow you to change numbers up and down as you see fit for example as you did here

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Surrender_at_Perevolochna&diff=197355718&oldid=193969900 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Poltava&diff=170543992&oldid=164772597 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Agincourt&diff=151074645&oldid=148361036

No sources no nothing just pulling them out from your ass, and you have done a million edits like that we both know this so why do you continue with your vandalism, the question as always is will you stop changing the numbers with numbers that you pull from your ass will you stop deleting sourced numbers, the answer is of course you won't you can't you are the absolute vandal in the absolute form you only care about your own agenda that is what makes you wikipedias number 1 vandal

Shipseggsbasket (talk) 20:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to understand English? you are the one removing sources, end of discussion, leave my discussion page and stop harrassing me. Irtehprwn (talk) 20:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

conflict[edit]

Hi. Please, for the edition conflict, use the page's talk page. MOJSKA 666 (msg) 19:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I answered you in the talk page. MOJSKA 666 (msg) 19:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware of 3RR rule[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Battle of Holowczyn. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Shipseggsbasket (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008[edit]

I have indefinitely blocked this account because it's clearly a sock puppet account. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 13:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]