User talk:Ghost of starman

Blanking of Time shifted advertising

This is more an FYI than an official admin warning, as your actions certainly appear to have been in good faith for the good of the project. But please be aware, blanking of pages is never the proper way to handle bad content on the project. There are ways to get rid of the content. Your first action, to submit the page for speedy deletion, was proper. It was improper for the anon to remove your speedy notice before an admin could go over it. You would have been in the right to replace the notice and warn the anon about removing it. If it had been an admin officially declining the Speedy, that would have been a different matter, but it was not. And WP:AFD is also allways a proper option. Anyway, I have now deleted the article myself as blatant advertising from before you blanked it. Please just keep this all in mind the next time you run across such a situation. - TexasAndroid 17:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Apollo Moon Landing hoax conspiracy theories. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. These removals must be discussed on the talk page -MBK₀₀₄ 23:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

edits were discussed on talk page, please read more carefully, as any admin should make sure to do. Ghost of starman (talk) 23:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They were not recently discussed, and such your constant edit warring and removals are clearly against policy. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

Hi. Regarding this edit, we really can't have non-free images in user space. Wikipedia policy only allows the use of non-free content in articles, and even then under a specific set of conditions. Please remove that image from your user page. Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 23:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

You cannot have non-free images on your userpage. If you revert my removal I will remove your ability to edit your own userpage. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Apollo Moon Landing hoax conspiracy theories, you will be blocked from editing. It was not discussed, remove the text again and I will block you myself -MBK₀₀₄ 23:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

link to ONE example of this being discussed on talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_conspiracy_theories#This_article_is_inappropriately_biased you are obviously unfit to be an admin on this site, your tone is abusive and accusatory, you are becoming innapropriately emotional about this matter. please refrain from attempting to threaten me, permanantly blocking me from this site is not possible, as I can easily change my ip and reregister (you'd never even know it was me). That said, you should refrain from pursuing your POV vendetta against me, as it is behavior highly unbecoming of an admin, you are just sinking below (not even "down to") my level Ghost of starman (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to wikipedia policy, you personally MAY NOT block me. I quote: "Disputes

Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators. Administrators should also be aware of potential conflicts of interest involving pages or subject areas with which they are involved. An exception is made when dealing with unsourced or poorly sourced contentious biographical material about living persons"

We are involved in a content dispute, which is not regarding "contentious biographical material about living persons". You are not even allowed to block me. Nice try. Ghost of starman (talk) 23:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not in a content dispute with you. I have no opinion of the cited material that you are removing. You are engaging in an edit war without the proper discussion required for what you are trying to do. Also, your attempts to have a non-free image on your userpage won't do you an favors either. Plus, if you revert again you get blocked not only for edit warring but for violating the 3 revert rule as well. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Say what you like, your strong desire to block me no matter what is obvious. You are an overzealous, knight templar-like admin, undeserving of your position. I would like an apology for your harsh and unecessary treatment of mr. Ghost of starman (talk) 23:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies will not be issued in response to ~~threats~~personal attacks. FYI: I've protected the article in question in lieu of a block. Clearly discuss your motivations, and reasons along with what exactly you propose to do to the article on the talk page. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

in what way did i threaten you? you threatened me with an inapropriate block, i called you out on your poor admin skills. how do you construe that as a threat? I suposse it could be a threat to your future as an admin, but that's really your own fault for not being good at itGhost of starman (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong again. I did not attack you personally, i attacked your fitness as a wikipedia administator, in an admittedly harsh manner. still waiting for that apologyGhost of starman (talk) 00:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

STOP posting on my user talk page. If you seriously have a problem, bring it up through the proper means. Attacking my fitness as an administrator fails the personal attack guidelines of commenting on content, not contributors. Keep it up and that block will happen. -MBK₀₀₄ 00:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What, pray tell, are the proper means to resolve this dispute besides the actions I've taken? I've offered a solution where you apologize for mistreating me, and I will leave you and your beloved moon article alone. What else can I do, to deal with an arrogant and abusive comments posted by an administrator? Ghost of starman (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Truce?

How about this compromise? I can see how my actions could be considered heavy handed. I may have been out of line. As it stands the article is protected and I am stepping away from the computer for a few hours to eat and decompress. ---MBK₀₀₄ on the iPhone 00:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]