User talk:Gigasuperbunny

October 2011

Hello, and 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 Jijeung of Silla, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

• 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 NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, 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: Jijeung of Silla was changed by Gigasuperbunny (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.955352 on 2011-10-17T15:17:13+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jijeung of Silla with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. AL_LOCKE|^talk 15:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Jijeung of Silla with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Calabe1992 (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jijeung of Silla, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. EricSerge (talk) 18:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Your question on my talk page

This edit here:[1]. It had been previously removed as possible vandalism or as unconstructive three times. If you believe this statement to be true you need to cite it from a reliable source. Take a look here at citing and reliable source. Cheers. EricSerge (talk) 18:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok I see. I was trying to figure out how to cite it. I didn't think to use the sandbox a little first and get a feel for this. Thank you!

You are welcome. Glad I could clarify. EricSerge (talk) 19:16, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Repeated Vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. FASTILY ^(TALK) 19:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Gigasuperbunny (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I added historical information cited from a legitimate text. It's not a joke, it's an actual legend about Jijeung. If you don't believe me you can read chapter 23 of "The History of the Medieval World" by Susan Bauer. I'm not upset it was removed if it was offensive, and I didn't realize that it would not be acceptable, but I do wish to have me freedom to edit reinstated. If I am given my right to edit back I will avoid such "controversial" language. Gigasuperbunny

Accept reason:

I did an Amazon.com "Look Inside!" on the book and, lo and behold, this sentence was there as quoted. Given the nature of the edit, I can see why it was perceived as vandalism (most additions of a phallological nature are usually such), but given the sourcing, this appears to be a good faith edit about the legend behind a historical figure. (Whether the material merits inclusion in the article is a content discussion that is neither here nor there in terms of the unblock.) Kinu ^t/_c 18:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Really? You have a massive history of vandalism. Now, what page of Wise Bauer's book did you find that information on ... I don't seem to see it in my copy. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

My "history" had all revolved around this one edit. At first I just messed up my citations, but after I cited it properly I thought no one could get mad after I cited it correctly, guess I was wrong. It's in chapter 23 on page 163, lines 13-16 of that page. It says, "His mythical stature as the father figure of Silla is preserved in tales about him, which explain that Chijung had trouble finding a wife because his penis measured seventeen inches long." Since I have properly cited my addition, and clearly specified that it was "folklore" is what I did wrong? I do apologize for my previous "vandalism", that was purely because I was unfamiliar with citation on Wikipedia and didn't try it out in the sandbox first. Since then I have learned how to cite my work and will not use a public article to test out my writing. Gigasuperbunny (talk) 02:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

• Unblocked; see above. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)