User talk:MrHedless85

California regulations?

Hi. At Talk:Methyl iodide, I have posed questions about why Wikipedia should not be reporting on breaking news in the American province of California and about the appropriateness of the edits. Please participate in this discussion and maybe we can make some headway vs reverting each other? Thanks, --Smokefoot (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Vandalism"

You need to slow down and stop reverting "vandalism" until you're clear on what vandalism actually is. In a number of cases, you're reverting arguably reasonable edits with the claim that they're vandalism. If you don't slow down, your account may be blocked until it's clear that you have a handle on how to identify and revert vandalism. MastCell ^Talk 19:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, since this shows no signs of slowing down, I've blocked this account. Can you give some indication of what your intentions are, and some assurance that you'll stop running around edit-warring with mistaken claims of vandalism? If so, I'd be happy to unblock your account. MastCell ^Talk 19:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I want to show that I can be unbanned. I am former vandal here. Fact that I am still banned in such situation is nonsense. MrHedless85 (talk) 19:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recently made edits to Cafe Coffee Day which were immediately reverted by this user. I have no idea how this person decided that those edits were vandalism. I am suspicious of any claims of ignorance.122.172.157.161 (talk) 19:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

¿WTF? MrHedless85 (talk) 19:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about my revisions to Cafe Coffee Day struck you as a "deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia?" Before you decide to continue removing vandalism, you should note that there are VERY legitimate reasons to remove large blocks of text in articles. My Cafe Coffee Day edits, which changed the article from a corporate pamphlet to something more encyclopedic, was one of those legitimate changes. I see you also make good vandalism decisions, but your false positive rate may be too high for this work. I ask you leave vandalism detection to others.122.172.157.161 (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are currently banned? Can you point me to your other accounts and/or IPs which are banned or blocked? MastCell ^Talk 19:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See current userpage, it has relevant categories. MrHedless85 (talk) 19:21, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite sure what you mean by this.122.172.157.161 (talk) 19:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mean tag content of User:MrHedless85. Click on the links whenever they are. I really would appreciate unbanning, but User:LukasPietsch is the one who solely forfeits any chance to return, while others would amnest me more readily. He is German and nazi-like without conscience, much like ↯↯. MrHedless85 (talk) 19:23, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I acknowledged, you have made some good rvv edits. You have made far too many bad ones. Take, for instance, this removal: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kiko4564&diff=prev&oldid=400899996. You cannot possibly justify the removal of arguments on a block debate. Ban this IP.122.172.157.161 (talk) 19:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MastCell, please help me become unbanned, this bananization is nonsense. MrHedless85 (talk) 19:31, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you're using admin-impersonation accounts and continue to refer to fellow editors (groundlessly) as Nazis and SS members, I think my gut instinct for the indefinite block was the correct one. If you'd like another admin to review the block, you can use the {{unblock}} template, or check out the guide to appealing blocks. MastCell ^Talk 19:32, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not to all. Only to this German one, which is solely based on my very long experience in contact with him. He is like non-penetrable concrete wall of gas chamber. MrHedless85 (talk) 19:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not appropriate to compare other editors to Nazis. Since you seem determined to use your talk page to amplify such comparisons, I've locked it. If you'd like outside admins to consider unblocking your account, please email unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org. MastCell ^Talk 19:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even this user's legitimate revisions are not terribly co-operative; containing the most confusing and stupid edit summaries. See [1]. Simply reverting a few things just to get into the community's good books does not work around here, unless you actually try and show a good attitude. --Dorsal Axe 19:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]