User talk:Jud383729/Phil Simms
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Your edit to Jeff Conaway
Hello. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Otherwise, people might consider your edits to be vandalism. Thank you. --Scott3 22:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Perry Satullo
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --HBK|Talk 04:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC), reinstated 05:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- Also, please don't edit other people's comments on your talk page unless they're obscene or vulgar. --HBK|Talk 05:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Re: Michael Cole
Whether it's true or not, you do need a reliable source to include that information, which was the main reason I removed it. Sorry if I assumed bad faith a little bit, but you'll never believe the stuff some vandals come up with, and a wrestler having a crush on an old lady is fairly odd. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 05:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Lee Marshall
Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --HBK|Talk 05:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- Note To Administrator reviewing my wrongful ban
He piled up these warnings in the morning hours while most people were asleep, therefore not allowing me time to discuss his misunderstandings with him.
Your edits to Art Donovan
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --HBK|Talk 13:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Note To Administrator reviewing my wrongful ban He piled up these warnings in the morning hours while most people were asleep, therefore not allowing me time to discuss his misunderstandings with him.
- I am not entirely certain about the time between the edits to Perry Satullo and Lee Marshall, but I can testify for a fact that the edits to Art Donovan took place AFTER I posted the warning re Lee Marshall. Scant minutes after, in fact. --HBK|Talk 00:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Mr. Michaels, obviously I did not see these warnings IF they did indeed happen minutes after eachother, but do you remember Wrestlemania 12 when you won the iron man match against Bret Clarke? Time didn't matter then due to certain reasons we all could not predict. What you mistook as vandalism in my additions was actually interesting and not widely known tidbits. I thought these tidbits would interest the readers much like they did me. God Bless and Aloha. --User:Jud383729
- Yes, yes, it's an "interesting and not widely known tidbit" that Perry Saturn was actually trained by a fictional character from a bad movie, and Dog the Bounty Hunter's child has 23 godfathers and was born in 3 different cities. Save it; you're not cute, you're not funny, and you're not a unique snowflake. --HBK|Talk 03:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Mr. Michaels, I'm no unique snowflake, but I bet you are right? The only people who say that are the people who think they themselves are the snowflake while everyone else is the same as the rest. Obviously I wish no disrespect and enjoy writing with you. I will even be the first to admit that I am not on the same level of comedic talent as the "comedic" wrestler whom you base your name off. I mean who can shake their stomach as funny as Meanie? Or get their expletive kicked by JBL as funny as Meanie did, but that's not the point. On the topic of Saturn, as I said before, if you would have seen that "bad" movie you would realize that Mr. Bandini taught Saturn as well as Sid Vicious more than anyone without a doubt. It is also pretty much impossible for world famous bounty hunter Duane "Dog The Bounty Hunter" Chapman to have 23 godfathers, however on a similar note he is the godfather of multiple people. I enjoy arguing and discussing our disagreements and hope that we can put our differences behind us and put an end to all these insults. God Bless and Aloha. Jud383729
Your edits to Nanuet, New York
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Nanuet, New York. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Note that Duane Chapman was born in Commerce City, CO [1]--MMX 15:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Your edits to Alan Thicke
Deliberately importing an image onto Wikipedia using an existing image's name, in order to replace the existing image with a new image that is provocative, offensive, or intended to push a POV agenda, is seen by Wikipedians as vandalism. You risk being blocked from editing Wikipedia for such an action. Please do not do it.
Compare current: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Thicke&oldid=69397948
With revision by Jud383729: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Thicke&oldid=69330699
--MMX 15:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Request to be Unblocked
Jud383729 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
While some people may not like tidbits of information on Wikipedia that they did not put there themselves being put on to Wikipedia pages, it does not make it vandalism when the tidbits used are facts. I never received the sufficient warnings in order to place a ban within a reasonable period of time. I had edited a decent number of pages adding tidbits that certain jealous people with nothing better to do labeled as "vandalism." These people quickly edited ALL of the pages that I had added information to and warned me with the correct warnings in able to place a ban upon this user, however after I received this warning I did not edit any more pages, instead these users continued to wrongfully and completely edit my added information. Obviously if I would have seen this warning in a correct time frame I would have acted quickly to spead with these users and try to fix the problem. With this ban that has become impossible. I appreciate you reading this and hope that you will reconsider your original ban.
Decline reason:
Editing other users' comments (after this unblock request), particularly after being asked not to do so, is misleading and a strong indication of bad faith. Please consider your actions and, if you intend to edit in good faith (and not persist in negative behaviour after warnings), please list a new unblock request below. // [admin] Pathoschild (talk/map) 23:16, 13 August 2006 (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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Jud383729 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I appreciate your faith in me and rectfying this wrongful block. I do have one question though, and this is not as a question to incite argument, as I mean no disrespect, but I feel that a person's "talk page" is their ground and therefore they should be allowed to control the wrong and hurtful messages put on it. What if a random person not familiar with what has gone on visits my talk page and sees all these warnings and hurtful messages, not understanding I did not "vandalize" these pages and it was simple misunerstandings I feel that it is my duty to moderate and keep my page clean on a consistent basis. Once again I appreciate this and I will add/edit in ways that you will consider good faith. P.S. I do not know why it says decline reason after my request, however You did tell me to list a new unblock request, which I have done in good faith as you requested.
Decline reason:
Your block will expire in about an hour anyways, so this should provide you with ample time to reconsider the past behaviour that got you blocked in the first place. Meanwhile, I strongly recommend that you look at How to archive a talk page on how to appropriately archive your talk page. Archiving other people's comments is acceptable. Changing their comments is not. --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:07, 14 August 2006 (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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Do not change other people's comments
Hi Jud383729. Please do not change other people's comments. You are free to archive your talk page, but you are not allowed to change other people's comments. You have already been warned about this. --Deathphoenix ʕ 21:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Your edits to User_talk:Jud383729
This is your last warning. Removing legitimate warnings from your talk page is considered to be disruption. You will be blocked from editing Wikipedia and your talk page will be protected from editing if you do it again.
Removed forged comments attributed to myself and others and replaced with original text. This continues a pattern of bad faith edits from this user. --MMX 21:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)