Don't look back in anger
Comments change
Comments such as this edit summary are not very helpful. In the future, please try to restrain yourself. Thanks, Lauryn Ashby (d) 23:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was referring to the edit summary in the above diff where you said "is this wikipedea for the exeptionally stupid?". Comments like that are not helpful. Lauryn Ashby (d) 23:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, calling the readers of this particular Wikipedia "exceptionally stupid" does harm the readers. So, your comment is incorrect. It's not a matter of me "lighten[ing] up", but a matter of civility. Thanks, Lauryn Ashby (d) 00:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
January 2010 change
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to helpfully change the encyclopedia, we must ask that you assume good faith while talking with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about changing this encyclopedia. Thank you. Pmlineditor ∞ 14:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Warning change
Your comments are disruptive to the project. Comments such as this project being for stupid people, and being the simpletons wikipedia are not tolerated here. You have a single chance to change and become a useful editor who follows the rules. Failure will simply see you blocked from contributing at all. fr33kman 14:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Once the block has ended you can make helpful changes. Please read Wikipedia's blocking policy and remember that adding spam, making changes that do not have a neutral point of view, making personal attacks on others, not respecting other people's privacy, and vandalizing pages are not allowed. If you do any of these things, you will be blocked again.
If you think this block is unfair, you can ask to be unblocked by adding {{Unblock|your reason here}} below. If you cannot do this or the reason is private please send an e-mail to simple-admins-l@lists.wikimedia.org and an administrator will look at your reason and reply. You may want to consider reading our guide to unblock requests before requesting to be unblocked. fr33kman 16:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
You are welcome to return in two weeks and start working on the encyclopedia. I'll warn you right now, however, that if you continue your poor behaviour on your user talk page access to that will also be removed. If you continue to act in the way you have after you return, you will be blocked indefinitely since you have not contributed anything to the project except poor behaviour. fr33kman 17:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Unblock me [refactored personal attack] change
This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Don%27t_look_back_in_anger (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)
Request reason:
I have done very little wrong, all I did was write about this being a simpletons wikipedea in an edit summary, which I had no-idea anyone ever read, It was a harmless jest, & fr33kman has blocked me beacuse i stood up for my self when trying to finish the argument he started & actively continued. I had offerd to let the past stay in the past but he refused, twisted my words & blocked me. I informed him of the article about not biting new users(i only discovered this WP yesterday) & he has been very trollish & rejected my request for forgiveness & closure.
Decline reason:
No where do you address the reasons for your block, namely your blatant incivility. No. Set out for two weeks and if you feel like you can contribute constructively, then come back. -- Lauryn Ashby (d) 20:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes I did have incivillity & I have tired to make peace with fr33kman but he simply blocked me. so, i am hoping that you are more civilised, even if you don't unblock me, can we at least let bygones be bygones, so I can finish these stupid arguments, which i'm offereing you the chance to not continue. & I have constructed constructiveley, I put the correct genre for the punk rock band Green Day, stated thier country of origin, & i also added to Los Angelese, both of these places are where my comments (which I didn't know anyone would see) were.
Violation of block change
You have violated your block by editing from an IP address.[1] Presumably this is your school. The school (via the council) has been informed of this action and editing by all accounts (named and anonymous) from it is disabled. Your action has thus prevented other people from editing Wikipedia. Please just wait the two weeks and then come back. I am not picking on you in anyway, I am simply doing what I was elected to do. fr33kman 12:08, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- And if you comeback, please be constructive. --MW talk contribs 16:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
@ Fr33kman: Check the page i edited, you will find I was very constructive. I don't care about you picking on me, or the fact you've gone mad with power, I have any IP I choose (within reason) & I shall edit from wherever i fnd to my hearts content, & I have now discovered there isn't that much that can stop me.
I have a story: A man goes to an orphanage & give all of them new toys & makes a large donation to the owner, on his way home after wards he calls them "Irritating migets".
I have another story: A man goes to wikipedea & makes some edits to improve the incorrect information & adds more detail, building the article, but, on 3 of his edits he made comments in an edit summarry about the sort of people who use that particular wikipedea.
what do the stories have in common? both time the good seriously out weighs the bad.
& do what you like to my school as it really doesn't matter, it's blocked anyway!! (not beacuse of me, before you make suggestions as to why.) Don't look back in anger (talk) 18:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Blocked change
