User talk:Cjk91

Welcome!

Hello, Cjk91, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 02:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling on Republicna Monarchy Debate Page

Thanks for your spelling corrections on the article. I reverted them only to bring the article back to its pre-merger form for the Republicanism in the UK. If you wouldn't be opposed to re-checking gain or after the merger it would be appreciated. Sandwich Eater 16:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absinthe

The spelling changes you made to Absinthe were not a reversion to a previous form, they were an edit. Neither British English nor American English is more appropriate, since it's not an invention of either country. Therefore, the dialect is chosen by those who write the article. Ari is the main contributor to the Absinthe article and he's the one who brought it to featured article status. He's not a vandal, and his contributions shouldn't be labelled as such. When Absinthe became a featured article, here, it used American English (as it has done since 2003). It's not vandalism to keep it that way. Kafziel ^Talk 14:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've explained this already; if you continue to disrupt Absinthe as you have been doing, it will be treated as vandalism. Please, let's not do that. Kafziel ^Talk 17:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you've given no justification. The original stub might have used Commonwealth English, but since it's been a full article it has used American English. The number of countries mentioned in the article is irrelevant. It also mentions France and Switzerland, but that doesn't mean the article should be in French. There's no need to discuss this on the article's talk page; you're the only one who seems to have a problem with it, so your user page is the proper place. Also, you shouldn't call other people's changes vandalism unless they really are. You didn't "revert" anything with your first change, and you are the one who made the change so you need to discuss it on the talk page. Kafziel ^Talk 17:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear from your contributions that pretty much all you do here is try to bully articles into using British English. I don't have especially strong feelings about the language issue, but I don't like it when users claim to be reverting vandalism when in reality they are making changes. I also don't want to get into an edit war with you, so I'm leaving your most recent change until other users can have some input.

By the way: you can sign your comments by typing the ~ four times in a row. Kafziel ^Talk 17:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I need to defend my record to you, but it is true that I do modify dialects where I feel it is appropriate. It would appear that our two most recent edits have been erased from the history page anyway. Thank you for your information on signing. Cjk91 18:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely wrong and the only one who wishes these changes to the absinthe page. You have contributed absolutely nothing to the page of value. Perhaps if you had something useful to offer the discussion or topic, your opinion of which spelling choices should be used would be better received. Until then, refrain from trying to impose your will on the world.

Please go on Kafziel's talk page to see how discussions between Ari, Kafziel and me have gone. You have been most unhelpful by reverting the page when clearly we have deicded to go down the route of discussing it properly. Also, please sign your comment. Cjk91 08:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absinthe II

Okay, now you need to stop. The discussion on the article's talk page has made it quite clear that the majority of editors (in fact, all of the editors so far, including UK editors) feel that American English is most appropriate. Please move on, and stop disrupting the page. Kafziel ^Talk 17:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I was writing my views here, Kafziel got in first. As one of the UK editors who voted for American English, I suggest you now listen to the view of the majority. Alanmoss 17:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Absinthe, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kafziel ^Talk 18:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Absinthe, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kafziel ^Talk 18:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Kafziel ^Talk 18:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hypocrisy Cjk91 18:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeking a revision; I'm seeking to keep it the way it was. If you want to change it, you need to get consensus. I don't need to do anything at all to maintain the status quo, particularly because consensus is with me. It seems I'm always stuck being the bad guy in these situations, though, and I can accept that. Kafziel ^Talk 18:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The way it was". We could have another debate on exactly where this article started. But I don't really think we need to. And consensus is with you? Really? People don't even know which two dialects they are debating! I do not think you're "the bad guy", I have seen your contributions to other articles and your help to users and have nothing but respect for you for that. But I think you're being quite heaving-handed in this instance. Cjk91 18:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So what you're saying is that the five other people who disagree with you simply aren't intelligent enough to have a valid opinion on the subject? Nice. Kafziel ^Talk 19:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, because they don't know what they're disagreeing about. It's not "British English Vs American English". Cjk91 19:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't try to make this a semantic argument. And, by the way, sock puppetry won't help your case any. Kafziel ^Talk 19:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

~Kylu (u|t) 05:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sock tag removal

Please do not remove the sockpuppeteer tag from your user page. The tag has been placed there in accordance with Wikipedia policy. A check of your IP address (here) confirmed that you were using a sockpuppet in an inappropriate manner; the sockpuppet you were using was blocked indefinitely and that tag was placed on your user page to notify others in the event of future disruption. Removing the tag is considered vandalism. Kafziel ^Talk 22:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to remove the sockpuppeteer tag from your userpage, you may be blocked from editing. Kafziel ^Talk 05:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]