User talk:AKR619

Blocking

Well I was saving this until I was unblocked, when the original block expired in 3 days, but no the mod went crazy and extended it to 2 weeks, then 4 weeks, and now indefinite just because I said something. This block started when I edited the Australia page saying Nicole Kidman hated her performance in this movie, and Mark (the uptight mod who deleted me) claimed that the citation I gave said no such thing [1], now it says Afternoon Fix: Even Nicole Kidman Hated Nicole Kidman in Australia, last time I checked hated means...well, hated. I bet Mark didn't even bother to click on the link, because it's right there right For the record I loved Australia, it was for a couple of weeks my pick to win the Best Picture Academy Award this year. Now Mark if you're still uptight about the whole nickers comment, you damn well deserved it for being so stupid.

I have only blocked you for 4 weeks, then increased it to indefinite. I don't know what those other, shorter, blocks are to which you refer. The edit to the Australia movie article didn't play any part in my decision to block you; the block was brought on by you continuing to use edit summaries to attack other editors ("Yobmod came, he saw, he fucked up this article", "this is vandalisim", "oh shut up sockpuppet of GabrielKat") despite several warnings [2][3][4]. I increased it to indefinite when instead of requesting an unblock, as is your right and is explained by the block notifications, you implied I like to wear "nickers", which is clearly just a continuation of the same behaviour which led to your block in the first place. I would have been open to reducing your block if you had undertaken to actually start behaving in a mature and civil manner and politely requested a reconsideration of your block (in fact, I am still open to that). You make some good edits and it would be preferable to have you continue to contribute to Wikipedia, but I do not believe that should occur unless you agree to behave like an adult in future, and to engage people in discussion rather than perpetuating revert wars. - Mark 02:09, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

When I said "Yobmod came, he saw, he fucked up this article" this was because I was extremely pissed off at Yobmod's constant deletion of links to actual themes used in science fiction and giving rules for the page which makes finding themes that can be used on the article more harder then a pet owner's decision to put down their beloved animal (we had to use themes that were used in science fiction, they couldn't be used in any other genre, they had to appear in more then one franchise and we couldn't use several dozen tv shows as citations). Although what you did to the Home and Away character articles you'd probably agree with him. It's obvious that user who found a citation to Willow being produced by Imagine Entertainment is a sockpuppet of GabrielKat, and his/her edit to my discussion page really annoyed me. Anyhoo, yes I do agree to behave in a more civilised manner, like I was before, but even civilised people react so uncivilised if they are constantly annoyed by someone. --AKR619 (talk) 07:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Please make an extra effort to be civil in future. I am going to shorten your block back down; it will expire in a couple of days. Please assume good faith in relation to people's edits in future: calling good-faith edits/content disputes "vandalism" doesn't calm the situation. As for the Nicole Kidman edit of yours which I reverted, I was looking at the wrong article when I said it didn't say what you said it said. But someone added a clearer blurb of her comments after I reverted you anyway. - Mark 08:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to List of members of the WWE Hall of Fame. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. TJ Spyke 03:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I have four things to talk to you about.

1. Don't put GabrielKat into my edit changes. You and I were at odds long before GK was involved.

2. I think it's safe to assume that your additions to the Amblin Entertainment page was a misunderstanding on your part.

3. About the Imagine page, I had to add that citation to Willow on that article, because you obviously wouldn't have believed me otherwise. I will continue on this subject.

4. Are you an IMdB member? The Imagine Entertainment website and the Wiki article starts the list of films with the 'Burbs. Yet on one point the Imagine Entertainment profile on IMdB mentioned five other movies made before 1989 (End of the Line, Like Father, Like Son, and No Man's Land, released in 1987, and Willow and Vibes, released in 1988). I made my revisions to the article based on what the IMdB listed (I know IMdB isn't the Gospel). Yet my revisions ended up being deleted twice by you and YOUR SOCKPUPPETS! More than two weeks ago, all five films I mentioned disappeared off of the Imagine profile (sort of like when your so-called "Amblin movies" appeared on IMdB's Amblin profile). That's why I added that Willow citation. As for the other four movies, I will add citations on the Imagine page as soon as I can find proof.

I hope I cleared some things up for you.--67.149.21.173 (talk) 20:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at List of members of the WWE Hall of Fame, you will be blocked from editing. TJ Spyke 04:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

List of science fiction themes

• Please discuss changes that you plan to make. Many of the links which you keep putting back into List of science fiction themes are themes (e.g. capitalism, anarchism, assassination) which often occurs in any fiction, not only science-fiction. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
• Please stop your campaign of undiscussed edits in List of science fiction themes, or I or someone may in the end feel forced to block you. Please put complaints in Talk:List of science fiction themes, not as <ref>--</ref> tags in List of science fiction themes. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Please remain civil

Woah, there. Please do strive to remain civil, when you can -- edit summaries like this one are unlikely to calm anything or anyone down, and usually don't help to resolve anything. If you're that upset, it may be a good idea to take a breather for a moment? – Luna Santin (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of science fiction themes. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Mo0[talk] 10:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for engaging in an edit war at List of science fiction themes. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Mo0[talk] 10:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The above block was instated upon further review of the situation and your violations of 3RR and general civility policy. You've been blocked in the past for this behavior, as well, hence the 3-month block. Mo0[talk] 10:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for You escalated to further personal attacks after you were blocked.. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Mo0[talk] 10:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Johnny Bravo (character)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Johnny Bravo (character), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Bravo (character). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Enco1984 (talk) 14:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Udrogoth

I have nominated Udrogoth, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Udrogoth. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Master&Expert (Talk) 19:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of items in Dave the Barbarian

I have nominated List of items in Dave the Barbarian, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of items in Dave the Barbarian. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Reyk _YO! 22:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)