User talk:Mazeofmonochrome

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

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 150.199.117.70 lifted or expired.

Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  03:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome![edit]

Hello Mazeofmonochrome! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you you need any help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing!  Netsnipe  ►  03:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

IP address blocked again[edit]

I was told that the block on this IP address was lifted last night. However, as I was attempting to edit something this morning, the same message came up informing me that I had been indirectly blocked because "Paid 2 Make Girs Panic" had recently used this IP address. Does this block come on automatically when that user logs on? Do I just have to keep requesting the block be lifted? As I explained when I requested that the block be removed, this is a college's IP address and will affect anyone living on campus. Please help. Mazeofmonochrome 12:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

First, you've been caught in what's known as an autoblock; if a vandal is blocked with autoblocks on, then the IP that they used is blocked for 24 hours, and other users can't edit through that IP. So it's not caused automatically when the vandal logs on, but rather when they are blocked (sometimes a vandal will switch to a different username after the autoblock ends, and then that will be blocked too, causing another autoblock).
You can use {{unblock-auto}} to request that an autoblock is lifted (there will be instructions in the block message). If this happens infrequently, that's probably the best thing to do.
If there is heavy vandalism from an IP, but legitimate contributors there too, sometimes the IP will be 'soft-blocked' (by an admin who notices what's happening or by someone else requesting it); this prevents new accounts being created via that IP, and prevents edits from that IP, but allows users with existing accounts to continue editing through it. (This is sometimes done with shared IPs corresponding to schools.)
Finally, if an IP is highly dynamic, it can be made immune to autoblocks, but if the IP is reasonably static this wouldn't be done because it would make it much harder to stop vandals who were using that IP (a softblock would be used instead when vandalism started).
So for the moment, I'd recomment just using {{unblock-auto}} whenever this happens; if the problem becomes more persistent, contacting the admins' noticeboard and explaining the problem is probably the best thing to do.
Hope that helps! --ais523 12:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I've lifted the autoblock again. --  Netsnipe  ►  14:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Who should I talk to about this problem?[edit]

{{helpme}} A block on this IP address was issued because of the user "Paid 2 Make Girls Panic." I have asked to have this removed multiple times. After having the block lifted, there was a window of about five minutes in which we were able to edit Wikipedia. This is a huge problem not only for this writing class (which has an entire unit dedicated to trying to help Wikipedia's cause), but also for anyone trying to contribute to Wikipedia on this campus. In blocking this IP address, an entire college is prohibited from editing pages. Is there someone that I can talk to about getting this block removed indefinitely? Can the user causing issues not just have their account banned? Why is there such a short time frame between the block being removed and it being put back on? I am also going to post the request to remove the autoblock again.

Please remove again?[edit]

YesY

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

You were giving us the wrong IP address. 127.0.0.1 is the default loopback IP address. I have removed the autoblocks resulting from the block on Paid 2 Make Girls Panic (talk · contribs). Hopefully, everything should work now. Please leave a message here if you still have a problem.

Request handled by: Nishkid64 (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Gold star for your edits, Mazeofmonochrome.

There are only three edits I would question.

1) I would leave "with" on the care bear page to keep a parallel construction.

2) I would rewrite the sentence on TPS as follows: "This comes from a scene in which Peter Gibbons (the main character) forgets to put the new cover sheet on his TPS report, which his boss, Bill Lumbergh, informs him is a standard practice according to a recent memo. The explanation that "We're putting new cover sheets on all of our TPS reports now before they go out," is usually followed by "Didn't you get the memo?", one of Bill Lumbergh's lines."

3) I would rewrite the sentence from Alice as follows: "Though Alice was working for Umbrella, her willingness to expose the corporation's dangerous and illegal ... is revealed." Mcwabaunsee 01:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Your environmental edits[edit]

Thanks for the joining the Env. Records Task Force, which I think is really important. I'm a little concerned about your env. edits, however. First, might it be a good idea to add records sections, as the TF specifies, instead of sections called "environment?" Second, and more importantly, the two sections you've added read like advertisements for the corporation and do not present any information independent of the corporations' self-descriptions as environmentally progressive. Again, I value your participation, but think the task force is largely intended to counter PR, not to reproduce it.Benzocane 17:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


McDonald's[edit]

Benzocane makes a very sound point. This section should provide as neutral and comprehensive a perspective as possible. Your entry treats criticism of the corporations environmental policies as mostly unfounded. In terms of packaging, for instance, McDonald's, in response to criticism in the U.S., instituted environmentally friendly food containers there, but continues to use styrofoam in their restaurants overseas. So, these improvements concern framing and content; stylistically, grammatically, etc. your entry is looks fine.Mcwabaunsee 21:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sony[edit]

"...their effects on global warming, the environment, and resources." and "natural resources"? "...greenhouse gases that they put out..." New verb for "put out"? "...Sony wants to have one within 20 miles of anywhere in 95% of the U.S. populous..." This phrasing doesn't make sense. "...similarly to the way living creatures work" What does this mean?

The title "Bad Press" does not suit the section it introduces. This is another issue of framing. We should seek to create sections based on professionality and a nonpartisan consideration of all available information. Benzocane's comment that "the task force is largely intended to counter PR, not to reproduce it," is appropriate here. Don't lead your readers.Mcwabaunsee 21:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Subaru[edit]

"...and continuing their efforts..." What does this mean? Specify, or cut. "a significant step in the car manufacturing business" This phrase should be followed by a dash as well.

What about the rest of Subaru's environmental record? Any justified criticism?Mcwabaunsee 21:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

NVIDIA[edit]

Again, any criticism? Any info that doesn't merely hightlight the company's positive, advertised efforts?Mcwabaunsee 21:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Nice work on adding the Resin Systems page! Mcwabaunsee 15:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

YOU NEED MOAR MUDKIPZ[edit]

srsly. Czsargo 04:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Nomination of RS Technologies Inc. for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article RS Technologies Inc. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RS Technologies Inc. until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. shoy (reactions) 19:21, 25 July 2017 (UTC)