User talk:Kgeza67

Welcome!

Hello, Kgeza67, 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! From: (→Netscott) 07:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a courtesy for other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion).For further info see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. (→Netscott) 07:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sign you posts please

As a courtesy for other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion).For further info see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. (→Netscott) 07:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

Hello Kgeza67. Please discuss major edits on the talk page before making them. If you have any questions, please feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Have fun editing. =) Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 03:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanxs for the message! I think "unable to resist" is a given, since he's already handcuffed. The page later on states the reaction of witnesses, so it does highlight the incident in a balanced manner.
Oh...and you can sign you comments with ~~~~ which gives a signature and time stamp (makes life easier)! =D Jumping cheese

^Cont@ct 05:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss your proposal on the talk page before actually making them, since there are also other editors that heavily contribute to the page. ^_^ Jumping cheese

^Cont@ct 05:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have an issue with the page, please bring up a discussion on Talk:UCLA Taser incident. I'm sure we can sort things out.
In response to your question, I think it's necessary if the suspect continues to frail around and basically makes taking him or her into custody difficult. Slapping handcuffs onto a unruly suspect does not immediately subdue him or her in any manner. Officers still use batons to beat a suspect into submission, so using taser is much more humane and less traumatizing to the suspect. However, I do feel sorry for Tabatabainejad. But if a law enforcement officer tells you to do something, it's best to listen.
Don't bring that up during discussions to support your point (not saying anything about you, but in case you use my opinion to invalidate my edits as being POV) ;) Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 06:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear that! =D Jumping cheese

^Cont@ct 06:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bombing of Dresden in World War II

Please read Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. I suggest you discuss the changes on the article's talk page before you attempt to make them to see if you can build a consensus for the changes you wish to make. --Philip Baird Shearer 21:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Michael Richards

Hello Kgeza67, when you're reverting over the work of a number of editors you might want to review the diff afterwards to check and see if you reverted over general (non-content) fixes to the article. It's really poor form when one "blanket" reverts to the point of actually removing "fix-up" type edits (which just happend on your rv to tendancer). Take it easy. (→Netscott) 11:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, what he said... If you are going to revert controversial edits without truly participating in the discussion, at least make sure that the language you're reverting to makes sense.

"Michael Anthony Richards (born July 24, 1949) is an Emmy Award-winning, American comedic actor, three-time Emmy Award winner, writer, producer, and best known for playing Kramer on the television show Seinfeld."

Did you read that sentence to your yourself before you reverted? I know you didn't write it, but it looks and sounds awful. Taking sides in a content dispute is one thing, but butchering the readability of a paragraph is quite another.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 16:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

Hi Kgeza67. I have strong reason to suspect it was you who was performing inappropriate edits to the Michael Richards article under anonymous IPs (81.182.xxx.xxx) and violating the 3RR rule. Just so you know, when I have time, I'm may ask the admins who monitor Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets to look into it. If I turn out to be mistaken, please accept my sincere apology.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 19:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes... you will likely be blocked for this disruption. (→Netscott) 19:26, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]