User talk:Us3rMZMcBride

January 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to User:MZMcBride has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Mygerardromance (talk) 17:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to User:MZMcBride constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Mygerardromance (talk) 17:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Us3rMZMcBride (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i assume good faith and that wikipedia just made a mistake by blocking me

Decline reason:

AGF is not a suicide pact. — MBisanz ^talk 17:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This is an essay.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

There is a major problem at Wikipedia: the project there has run away with itself.

In my experience, it is inhabited by the biggest bunch of officious jerks you could ever hope not to meet. Even the IPs that edit there are infected with this lack of community spirit. People spend time (and sometimes money) traveling somewhere to get a requested picture, upload it and get silence. A year later, someone templates them: they didn't categorize it or they categorized it very very faintly wrongly, or it is on a subject that has "enough" photos or whatever.

These templates never begin "thank you for uploading..." or "can I help you with...". They're just nitpicking templates from people who only nitpick and move images from one category to another, unable to decide between them where they belong, but unanimous that the uploader is an idiot for not getting it right first time. I've watched as my images were endless shunted from one category to another category to another category, each editor somehow getting it wrong, but then writing to me to complain that I wasn't perfect first time.

That was hard enough to take on Commons, but they're now increasingly active here and bring their nasty habits with them, templating regular users to complain of the same imaginary problems or making veiled threats to stalk complainants' contributions, again without even the most common of courtesies.

Stuff wikipedia and its officious jerk editors - I'm helping Wikipedia by uploading free images, not damaging it, so they can fuck that for a game of marbles. ➨ originaly written by: ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 12:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Us3rMZMcBride (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]