User talk:Horry Daley

February 2015

Hello, I'm Saturn star. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Saturn star (talk) 04:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Edward Snowden. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 05:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to Haiku in English

Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Sunrise (talk) 08:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of English terms of venery, by animal. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 06:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  - Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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).

Horry Daley (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dennis Bratland] has removed my contribution to the definition of a group of geese. Since then he has continued to attack the character of myself which has in turn reduced my self-esteem. Horry Daley (talk) 04:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

If you continue to post crap and attack other editors after this block expires, your next block will be considerably longer. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:19, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

---

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.

From a neutral point of view, I do not see any reason for Dennis to revert Horry's edit to List of English terms of venery, by animal. There MIGHT be hounding here. Then again, I could be missing something. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Google "Horacemeter". The term plump, for a group of geese flying close together, does not in any way depend on any kind of metres of Horace. It's just the typical droll hoaxes that List of English terms of venery, by animal attracts. Or look at [1] and see that no such information is in the cited source. And even if none of that were the case, how could this be hounding? I reverted an edit to a page that's been on my watchlist for years, a page where I posted a user warning, and my own talk page. I didn't check anybody's contributions to go scrutinize edits on pages I don't edit. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:58, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

From an equally neutral POV, the 'Book of Australian Slang' first published in 1977 (although it did not sell any over seas copies, who had heard of Australia back then hey?) by Penguin books does define the lenght of a Horace as "That length just longer than a normal 30cm ruler and less than half a meter". Although a specific length was not prescribed the distance of 0.4metres (40cm) has been widely accepted downunder as the length of one Horace. I acknowledge there is little data to support the existence of the "Horacemeter" readily available online as its creation predates the Web. That said, references may be sourced from any of the following state libraries in Sydney, Melbourne and of course the National Archives in Canberra. I'm saddenned to see people trying to make a unique yet worthy contribution, one which may educate some, be so really dismissed by you Dennis. But having done some digging myself I see you have a reputation for censorship. Please don't be discouraged Horry Daley. Remember, you do count. TMasonator (talk) 04:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC) — TMasonator (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Even if that is true, why doesn't any other dictionary of Australian slang mention it? Even if it is actually Australian slang, why would anyone want to use it as a unit of measurement to explain a 'plump' of Geese? And even if we did, shouldn't that be explained at List of English terms of venery, by animal, rather than making personal attacks on my talk page? And how come all your previous edits are all vandalism? And why the sockpuppet account TMasonator? Seems like you're only here to disrupt Wikipedia. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:57, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Note: the content dispute is completely irrelevant to the block. Horry Daley engaged in personal attacks and harassment to get back at the editor who reverted their edits. That is the sole reason for the user receiving a short block.

@Horry Daley: - please review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for guidance on appropriate methods of dealing with a content dispute. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Multiple Accounts

It has been found that you have been using one or more accounts abusively or have edited logged out to avoid scrutiny. Please review the policy on acceptable alternate accounts. In short, alternate accounts or people to support you should not be used for the purposes of deceiving others into seeing more support for your position. It is not acceptable to use two accounts on the same article, or the same topic area, unless they are publically and plainly disclosed on both your and the other account's userpage.

Your other account(s) have been blocked indefinitely. This is your only warning. If you repeat this behaviour you will blocked from editing without further notice. Thank you. Mike V • Talk 15:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Bloody Top Bloke

Despite alot of the derogatory remarks made towards Horry Daley it has now been determined that Horry Daley fulfills all the criteria of being a bloody top bloke Horry Daley (talk) 02:34, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Elips, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Bamyers99 (talk) 15:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Your addition to Elips has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --Chris (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC)