User talk:Unbreakable MJ

"A legitimate registered user blocked as collateral damage from an IP block against an anonymous user" I'm blocked for the 100th time. Tired of explaining my Innocence (see messages below for example). I'm giving up. --Unbreakable_MJ 04:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't post messages to anyone and I couldn't email any admin (see this screenshot: http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c125/Mahoozi/Wikipedia%20blocks/Blocked3.jpg). I forced a disconnection and deleted all cookies, I've restarted my computer and waited few minutes. I'm waiting to be unblocked since hours. I've found a way to leave a message to El C without my nickname. --Unbreakable_MJ 11:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked. Can you edit now? NSL E _(T+C) at 05:09 UTC (2006-03-09)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello Unbreakable MJ, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! By the way, I see you've made some good edits to Windows XP. They may be just minor wikilinking, but every little bit counts. Thanks for helping out. Johnleemk | Talk 09:30, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinking years

Now that you point it out, there are a few more years wikilinked in that article that shouldn't be. There is also another problem, though, and I should mention it. Because of the way that the WP software works, full dates need to be wikilinked in order to have user date preferences work properly. So there is an exception to the general "don't wikilink years" guideline. I'll go through the entire article now and demonstrate what I mean. Jkelly 19:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the difference after my new edit, which should demonstrate what I was talking about. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I recall being confused about this detail myself not long ago. Jkelly 19:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Hi. Try to be conservative about page moves, as they cannot be undone by anyone other than an administrator. I have deleted Unbreakable (The Alicia Keys song). If there are many songs named "Unbreakable", and we need to distinguish between them, we should do it at Unbreakable (Alicia Keys song). We don't use the definite article in disambiguating parantheses. Imagine what would happen if someone created an article about a song by The The. Is there another song called "Unbreakable"? If not, we don't need to further disambiguate. Jkelly 04:23, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, don't give up on Wikipedia. If you want to add information about songs, that's great. Let me suggest a different approach, though. Find the article about the album that the song is on and put the information there. If there's too much, that is when to create an article about the song. Also, check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs which has all sorts of resources for writing about music on Wikipedia. And give yourself some time here to figure everything out. When I started, a left a trail behind me several articles long that had to be renamed, deleted, etc. We all learn as we go. Jkelly 04:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

removing the link in Invincible

Because I redirected the article on "Unbreakable" to the article on the Invincible album. "Unbreakable" wasn't a hit single, had no video prepared for it, and is not much more notable than any other track on Invincible (it didn't win any awards, it didn't significantly influence the state of pop music). Therefore, there's no need for it to have a seperate article: anything that needs to be said about it can be said in the article on the album (it features Brandy on backup vocals, a Biggie verse was snatched from a Shaq song, Michale Jackson wanted to put it out as single but couldn't).

Wikipedia articles on any subject have to be upheld to standards of notablility; we can't and don't write articles about any and everything. Generally, articles on songs should be limited to Top 40 or Top 20 hits, unless the song won a major industry award, or is otherwise notable as being highly influential or important to the development of popular music, or a signature song for a performer. --FuriousFreddy 04:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I apoligize that you spent two hours writing the article, but that doesn't mean that we can include it for that reason. There have been pages that have been deleted altogether for various reasons, which people spent hours writing. I'm not doing as I please; I'm trying to help maintain the encyclopedia. As a new editor, the pages at our Community Portal can help explain Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and editing procedures. --FuriousFreddy 04:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this, so I just thought I'd let you know, Unbreakable MJ, that the content you wrote has not been deleted; it's merely hidden. If you go to the Unbreakable article, it will redirect you to the Invincible article. However, there should be a small notice at the top of the article saying something like "Redirected from Unbreakable". Click on the link to Unbreakable, which should take you to the redirect page. Then click the history tab at the top of the screen. All your content should be there. You can then merge it with Invincible. Johnleemk | Talk 15:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Open proxy

Your account was permanently autoblocked because you appear to be operating from an open proxy. Open proxies are prohibited from editing because they are used to launch attacks on Wikipedia that are very difficult to counter. There doesn't seem to be much vandalism coming from your IP address, so I'll unblock it. However, note that your IP address is now identified as a suspected open proxy and may not be given warnings before future blocks. // Pathoschild 08:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: your message.

Thanks for the message. I never thought you were a bad user: I just wanted to explain the rules. As far as song articles go, articles on songs are generally only written if (a) that song was a famous recording/composition in its own right or (b) if it was a hit single. I was hoping to save the trouble of someone listing an article on Michael Jackson's "Unbreakable" for deletion, which would definitely have happened at some point. It would be best, if you want ot write good song articles, to write them for MJ's hit singles. For example, the Thriller (song) article is currently rather bad; even with a seperate article on the video, the one on the song should be better and longer. And if you know anything about his Motown work, the articles on both his and the Jackson 5's albums and singles could use expanding. And while not every Wikipedia policy is worthwhile, and some (the "consensus" voting) are easily abused, I happen to stand behind the NPOV rule, becasue that's what encyclopedias are supposed to be: neutral in their point of view. --FuriousFreddy 18:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Biodata

Hi, you can create a similar table by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Userbox#Grouping_userboxes. The same page links to a number of places where you can find userboxes to put in the table. HTH, Johnleemk | Talk 13:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Teh Scene

I was interested in making a little article on Teh Scene but it was deleted & protected. I wrote in the discussion page trying to get some kind of respond (nothing so far). Now I'm writing to you and wondering if you should leave the page protected or not! I dunno why that user did what s/he did but what about other people's chance to contribute? I'm trying to understand your POV, that's all. --Unbreakable_MJ 15:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh & I "expect responses on (my) own talk page" --Unbreakable_MJ 15:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Knock yourself out, I unprotected it. FYI, it's been repeatedly deleted because it has been persistently written as an article about a non-notable website that does not appear to meet WP:WEB or any other notability criteria, and in addition to that, the articles have been one liners like "Teh scene is a parody of The Scene" with a link. If you can write a quality, sourced article about a subject called 'Teh Scene' that meets Wikipedia standards, by all means, do so! If that's not the case, I predict a strong chance of more deletion in the future with a forecast of more page protection. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock

Hey Unbreakable MJ. Don't worry, you weren't blocked because of anything you did. You were hit by the autoblocker because someone has abused their editing priviledges from your IP address. Whenever this happens, just leave me a message by wiki or email and I'll unblock you. Alternately, you can place {{unblock}} on your page with a note that you were autoblocked, and another administrator will unblock you. I've overridden the autoblock; thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. :) // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 02:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

To answer one of your questions, autoblocked users are often able to edit any page in the talk namespace. Users blocked by an administrator can only edit their own talk page. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 02:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

You can try contacting the administrator of your network about that user's abuse, directing them to Special:Contributions/82.194.62.23 for evidence and information. There is a feature request to disable the autoblocking of established accounts; when or if this is implemented, you shouldn't have any problem with the autoblocker. Until then, there isn't much you can do. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 10:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry that you got blocked. I only had the block for 3 hours so it shouldn't have been too bad. gren グレン 14:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Block help

Hi. My response is here. Regards, El_C 13:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Teh Scene

Hi.

I know that the old "Teh Scene" article been deleted, and it was protected. Then someday I had a chance and it was unprotected, so I've made a new article, and did my best to make it as good as possible. I see it's deleted too and protected again. That's fine, though no reason is given or stated anywhere. I just need to know what is it that was wrong with what I wrote, or is it just the type of articles that should not be included in Wikipedia? I know that the old article was deleted many times because it didn't include much more than a link and such. Thant's all. Anyhow thanks for your time. --Unbreakable_MJ 04:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! There's no claim of notability, the Alexa ranking is over 1 million (as in there are 1.3 million websites more popular than it), and so on. Not every website gets a wikipedia entry, even if it is well written (btw, you did a good job considering the subject matter, it's the website that's the problem, not you). - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Allah"

Thanks for trying to improve the quality of the Wikipedia articles on Arabic language. You assert that "Allah" is a word and not a name. This is not correct, and there is no argument about it. "Allah" is a name and corresponds in usage to the English "God", but not the English "god". "al-ilāh" corresponds to the English "god" but not "God." In English, there might be a reasonable dispute about whether it is a word or a name, but that does not hold true for Arabic. This is not a question of religion: "Allah" is used for "God" by Christians, Jews and Druze as well as Muslims. Cbdorsett (talk) 06:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I greet you with the beautiful greeting of al-islam: assalamu alaykom wa rahmatu Allāhi wa barakatih. May the the peace, the mercy and the blessings of Allāh The Almighty be on you.

All praises be to to Allāh, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful.

I thank you for your message. My edit was made once and I am done with it. I am proud of that tiny edit, because I can explain it and also prove it.

However, one, it was your edit sister/brother who made the claim that it is His name, without backing it up. And two, your message says "there is no argument about it". So I accept that, and thank you again for your kind message. Three, is that time is not mine to be editing Wikipedia. I am glad there are people who do edits like you, while I am just a user/reader.

I am sure that your intention is good, and count on that. My intention was to at least keep Wikipedia's articles consistant. And all praises be to to Allāh, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. ~Muhammad N. Jassim ~MJ (talk) 04:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]