User talk:Don't look back in anger

December 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Psychology, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. justinfr (talk/contribs) 20:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signing Posts

The reason it is marked as unsigned is because your signature should have a link to your user page and talk page. You can edit your signature and blank it on the "my preferences" thing (so when seen, it will have a link to your user page and talk page) edit your signature so it links to your user page and talk page, etc. Whatever you do with your signature, it must link to your user page and talk page in order for SineBot to stop marking it as unsigned. --Ha dg er 20:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User talk:Coffee, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. If you disagree with the deletion of "your" page, you may take it to Deletion Review, however, attacking the administrator who deleted it is one of the quickest ways to earn yourself an indefinite block from editing. HJMitchell You rang? 16:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Don't look back in anger. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--J<Green> (talk) 15:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disrupted nothing. J (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What have you been smoking? i have sighned! J <color=green (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a bot. Maybe you forgot to sign a few times. Otherwise you can just go to SineBot's user page and learn how to opt out of his warnings and stuff. --Ha dg er 16:33, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

reply to comment on talk:talk pages

Just in case you missed it, I have replied to your comment at Help_talk:Talk_page#Discussion.2Ftalk... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 17:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Sarah Palin, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Bonewah (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what game you are playing at, but such an edit was completely inappropriate. Your editing privileges have been indefinitely revoked. You may appeal by adding {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. NW (Talk) 20:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is a totally unfair block

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).

Don't look back in anger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I heard she was dead. I haven't watched TV in a while so I wouldn't have seen the news, I heard she was dead from somebody on yahoo, & because I havent seen the news, they were my most accurate source. So I decided to add it to the wikipedea article. I was only trying to help, and I see that dispite people here being told to assume good faith, people hardly ever assume good faith, I used good faith in editing Sarah Palin. I have been blocked by Nuclear Warfare who has said "I don't know what game you are playing at" Making what I belived to be a constructive edit, is what I was playing at. Sorry for trying to help. If you want to block me for trying to improve wikipedea then a short tempory ban would be more appropriate than the unjust indefinate ban I have been given for 1 mistake. If I did constant vandilism then it would fit the crime, but I havent vandilaised anything. (actually that depends on you definition of vandalism, mine does not include mistake made while trying to help. [I ahve found a good definition: "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Note the word deliberate, that means purposely trying to ruin articles, not mistakely adding incorrect information while trying to help]) Take a look at my edits, you will see every article I have edited has been for the better. So, please don't ban me for a small mistake, I only wish to help. (& to be unblocked.)

Decline reason:

[Rather distasteful comment redacted. See more full explanation below. Redacted on 23:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)]

–MuZemike 21:38, 18 February 2010 (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.

Not an admin so this isn't a review, just a comment. Do you have a link to where you heard that she was dead? It wouldn't completely excuse not verifying it before adding, but it would help the admin to see what it was that mislead you.--Cube lurker (talk) 21:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it on yahoo answers, (& i'm now beginning to doubt the reeliability of Y!A), I have searched but not found it, so I'm guessing it was someone having a joke, I think the question has been deleted, but you could do a more thourough look to see if there is something similar if you want. heres a link to yahoo answers http://answers.yahoo.com/J (talk) 21:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did a search there. Did find this link[1] but to be honest, if that's the one I don't think it would help your appeal.--Cube lurker (talk) 21:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was on the Austrailian Y!A, that is similar, but not it, unfortueantly for me, the internet is like murcury. and could you please tell MuZemike that wikipedeans are meant to assume good faith and that saying someone is on drugs is NOT assuming good faith. but I'm glad that you do. I probably should have copied & reposted, but I didn't know I would need to at the time. J (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan of his statement on his decline, I do wish he left the drug reference out. To be blunt though you haven't given anyone too much to work with. You posted that a major political figure was dead. Now if that was the case it would be the top story on every news website on the internet. You wouldn't need to turn on the TV to see it. If we go with the belief that you weren't trying to vandalize, what we still have is you made a huge mistake that could have been prevented by looking at any news website. The only thing I can suggest is you think about what happened, probably sleep on it. Then try another request. This time owning up to your mistakes and explaining with some detail how you can make sure they never happen again. No promises, as I said even if not intentional, it was a huge mistake. The type of thing that gets wikipedia mocked in real news stories. But that's really your only shot.--Cube lurker (talk) 21:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. "I heard it from some guy who heard it from his girlfriend who heard it from some guy at work who heard it from that lady with the really good gossip who tends to be right about fifty percent of the time." You know, if it weren't for chat pages, the internet would be a very empty place. A good sort of empty, I grant you, but still... HalfShadow 22:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do apologize for being slightly over-the-top with my unblock comment. With that said, I agree fully with Cube lurker and HalfShadow, and I still question why you did that. Recently, Ron Livingston sued someone for posting false and potentially libelous information about him on Wikipedia. Ted Kennedy was reported to have died several months before his actual death last August, which caused a huge media uproar, not to mention an uproar here also. Biographies of living people are no joke. Adding false or otherwise completely unreliable, possibly harmful information about them can have serious reprocussions not only for you but for them also. If you wish to be unblocked, then you need to be clear about that. –MuZemike 23:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an image to an article

thumb|right|This is how you put an image in an article To add an image to an article, find the spot where you want to put the image and which image you wish to insert, and then use the following format:

[[:File:Lenna.png|thumb|right|This is how you put an image in an article]]

What you see to the right is the result of this. In general, if there are multiple images on one page, it's appropriate to alternate between the right and left sides to keep the images balanced throughout the whole of the page.

Hope this helps! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Don't look back in anger, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User talk:Don't look back in anger. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

See a log of files removed today here.

Shut off the bot here.

Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SHUT UP!!

Responding to your comment on User_Talk:DASHBot's page

Just be aware that you just told a bot, which is not human to stop, which can't respond to your requests, you can tell the owner though. ptmc2112 (talk | contributions) 15:12, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

yes, I did tell it to stop, & I don't need a response, I just needed it to B*gger off, which it did. :) but, thnx 4 the care. J (talk) 14:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Emma Coolidge

A tag has been placed on Emma Coolidge, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Padillah (talk) 14:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the English translation of your nerd speak is? J (talk) 15:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Robert Napier School

The purpose of a wikipedia article is to provide objective information, not to disparage others with language such as "scum" and "thickos". I have redacted the offending passages. Jimmy Pitt talk 15:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User page under construction tag

Just thought I should let you know you can put {{User page construction}} at the top of your page to show that it's under construction.Ptmc2112 (talk | contributions) 20:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]