User talk:80.181.235.120

May 2014

Please do not remove information from articles, as you did to Italian cuisine. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:23, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. Wikipedia is not censored. Any further changes which have the effect of censoring an article, such as you did to Italian cuisine, will be regarded as vandalism. If you continue in this manner, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 80.181.235.120. You have new messages at Ian.thomson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

For Ian

Hypocrite?! I have just addressed how on this website, people like you seem to be particularly fond of pointing out how everything which is Italian actually comes from Africa, China or anywhere! I do not see how that is done to other cultures. That's what I call hypocrisy. Another term whose true meaning you should learn, I'm afraid, ahahahahah! Also, what was there before was not that much noteworthy. I wanted to remove what was wrong, and so I did. But I need not to justify my literacy with such a lower being like you. I was awarded a C1 Cambridge certificate in English proficiency when I was 16, if you care. What we do on this website does not respond to what we are in real life, and personally I find it really pathetic to brand a person you've never known semi-literate just because I do not even care enough for this mafia (yes, Wikipedia is a mafia run by people like you) to invest that much of time into it. You see, what is the point of an IP to contribute, if a bit later the wonderful Ian.thomson walks by, and reverts their work, because they said so?

I wish you... Nah, really. I just wish people like you did not exist.--80.181.235.120 (talk) 23:18, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"- including Etruscan, Ancient, Greek, and Roman."

Explain that nonsensical sentence fragment that you left, over and over and over. How does that match up with your claimed certification? If this was a pissing context, I'd point out that I am natively proficient in English, had a 12th grade reading level in 2nd grade, and have bachelor's degree in English language and literature -- but this is an encyclopedia, and if you can't assume good faith or be civil, you should leave.

And did you get the message "Edit conflict" when you were trying to save your message to my page? That meant you were trying to save your edit at the same time as another messenger had saved their edit, and that you needed to refresh the page. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:29, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I meant what I've written, as I usually do. A filter popped up, preventing me from saving my answer to you because it clearly included abusive, derogatory abuse towards you, the innocent and heroic user. Funny though, it did not prevent me to post this response on my own user page. Schyzophrenic much? --80.181.235.120 (talk) 23:36, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"- including Etruscan, Ancient, Greek, and Roman." -- Explain that sentence fragment. It is proof that you were totally unjustified to call out anyone else on their language, or to say that other's edits should be "flushed down the drain". Ian.thomson (talk) 23:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now, now, my friend. If there's someone who should be asking for an explanation for their interlocutor's edits, in this little dispute of us, that should be me, and for a simple chronological reason! So, please, be correct (or try to!) and go forth: has the English language been influenced by the Anglo-Saxon language? Because, you see, in the past (yes, I really do not wish to scroll back the article's history and attach the matching link. It happened, we both know it, this is not a trial and I do not need to produce a proof!) you'd already reverted my edit on that matter. I do not care on what I've written (or, yes, omitted to write). I am simply trying (which is desperate!) to have you understand how you can't call said roots influences. Which, the previous time, you'd rollbacked. Also, It's almost 2 AM here and I'm going to bed. If you do not have anything else in my life and are simply, terribly, irresistibly caught up in this discussion, I'll be glad to continue tomorrow, or whenever I'm on. Peace :) --80.181.235.120 (talk) 23:49, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk: Ian.Thompson. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.