dirtycomputer/Wikipedia_Talk_Labels · Datasets at Hugging Face

rev_id int64 37.7k 700M	comment stringlengths 5 10k	year int64 2k 2.02k	logged_in bool 2 classes	ns stringclasses 2 values	sample stringclasses 2 values	split stringclasses 3 values	attack bool 2 classes
646,758,272	For More Information Call 9971833242	2,015	false	user	random	train	false
646,765,569	:You reverted my work for no good reason. You left a dishonest edit summary. You deleted my post asking you why. And then you dare to accuse me of not wishing to be polite? Don't be such an idiot.	2,015	false	user	blocked	test	true
646,766,245	` :#Well yes, obviously. Quote boxes highlight quotes. But repeating text is obviously pointless. :#The page is not ``monotonous``. If you think it is, then it needs comprehensive rewriting. :#The quotes in the text already have in-line citations. :#The quotes are not key facts and do not need to be brought out. The choice of which lines to ``highlight`` in this way is entirely arbitrary. Also, we have guidelines which say As a matter of style, quoteboxes should generally be avoided... Instead of using quoteboxes to highlight its notability, explain its importance before introducing the quote or in an introduction to the quote. And let me once again reiterate the key point - the quotes are already in the text, and do not need repeating in boxes. :You're plainly not interested in actually discussing this, and I find your bald ``conclusion`` rather immature. I am also troubled by your initial dishonest edit summary, and your deletion of my post on your talk page asking you why you reverted my edit. `	2,015	false	article	blocked	train	false
646,766,308	` == Reverting for no reason == Hi. I see you undid edits I made, with the summary ``keep approp formatting from WP:GA version``. As I'm sure you're aware, that is an entirely meaningless edit summary. It was not formatting that I changed, and the fact that an article has a little green cross does not mean that it cannot be improved. So, if you had an actual reason for the revert, please state what it is. If you didn't, then please don't do that again. You're damaging the encyclopaedia. `	2,015	false	user	blocked	test	false
646,766,471	:Reverting my edit for no reason was very rude. Repeatedly deleting my posts asking you why you did that without having the courtesy to answer me is extremely rude. Accusing me of being impolite while deleting my question is extremely rude. Behaviour like yours is extremely damaging to the encyclopaedia. Why not just answer the question? Do you regard it as your right to revert for no reason or something?	2,015	false	user	blocked	train	false
646,768,646	== Size of Scythia valid citation removal == This additional geographic information and valid citation was added to this article: According to Oxford University authors Samuel Arrowsmith, B Fellowes and Luke Graves Hansard in their 1832 book A Grammar of Ancient Geography, Scythia had two parts, Scythia Intra Imaum and Scythia Extra Imaum both covering a combined area of 1,129,000 mi² or 2,924,096 km².. If you dispute the source please provide other reliable sources that dispute the claim in this book which fulfills the criteria for inclusion here: WP:Verifiability until then please leave the source in place until we reach WP:Consensus on its inclusion or exclusion thank you.	2,015	true	article	random	train	false
646,774,516	:The goal.com article is simply a reprint of the Rund article which you have already suggested three times. I have explained above why it isn't in the article. The fact that she has written a testimonial for the website of a fashion designer she likes is neither noteworthy nor encyclopedic. Again, this is something for her personal website, not an encyclopedia article.	2,015	true	article	random	test	false
646,792,586	:::Well, I don't see how adding text breaks up the supposed monotony of text, and I think if there is such monotony, it should be solved by editing the text, which I certainly think could be quite significantly shortened. But, as there will be no duplication of text, I think your suggestion would certainly be an improvement.	2,015	false	article	blocked	train	false
646,798,526	::But how can I do any of this? I only make edits, cite sources and upload images . I have no idea how to initiate a merge or what you just said. I'm Wiki-disabled. And now another damn article has been made in the past couple of days: Abdul Rauf (militant commander). Four articles on the same person.	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
646,800,558	` : You have just removed the notice regarding deletion. This is not the correct way to challenge the deletion: there's a big blue button that says ``contest this speedy deletion``. If you wish to challenge the request for deletion, please use that functionality. With that said, you page is clearly a self-promotional one, which is why it was previously deleted under a different name, and is very much in contravention of Wikipedia's policies. `	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
646,811,525	` == Hey, just a heads up, users arer allowed to remove active block notices per the ``clarification`` of WP:BLANKING. == `	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
646,811,904	` You need to stop canvassing. Posting at Editor Retention was one thing. Spamming all of the women's wikiprojects is another. That smacks of trying to influence the debate. If you are going to notify random groups just because they have ``women`` in the title, you need to do the same for men's groups. `	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
646,827,639	REDIRECT Talk:2015 Cricket World Cup officials	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
646,832,710	` Thank you for your help, Ched. I must point out that I had originally requested review of this dispute but was DIRECTED to continue discussing this before that could happen. See Transportman's note. I am no troll and would never addressed these people directly on my own. Thanks to your intervention, I can now proceed to pursue mediation as I originally wanted. Why is it that ``incivility`` is generally the accusation of people who have both hooves in the trough? I am grateful for Dreadstar's help in reaffirming that aphorism. On another note, I received three email message from Dreadstar that she had left me messages, but - being blocked- could not read them, nor do I see them here today. It is remarkable being admonished by infallible people. `	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
646,834,550	I just now received another email message from Ched that he has sent me a message sent 8 minutes after the first, yet I see none here. Where are these hidden messages? The world wonders...	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
646,840,004	Well-spoken. But if Darwin had followed it where would we be? I will guard my speech as best I can. I was offended because a 69 year old woman had ridden horseback over a 13,777 foot pass in Kyrgyzstan to find this information and she was being characterized as a meddling dupe by these people whose rice bowl is obviously threatened by what she found. I believe that St. Francis himself would have slapped those people silly.	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
646,842,831	Ms. Scott Angstrom of New Zealand at the age of 69 rode horseback over a 13,777 foot pass in the godforsaken mountains of Kyrgyzstan to find these horses. As such she has contributed more to the welfare of the Appaloosa breed than anybody I see talking here. It is a sad reflection on America that her efforts should be greeted with the denigration that I have found on this page.	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
646,859,077	*165.95.148.199 Vandalism only. — (Email)	2,015	true	user	random	dev	false
646,859,888	== Miz == Cut the shit, son. Stop reverting the changes before you are reported to the admins.	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	true
646,866,132	` The following quotes are taken verbatim from the Appaloosa talk page. They are made by editors who self identified themselves as female. To my knowledge they have never been admonished or cautioned for these very questionable remarks. I on the other hand find myself permanently blocked by ``dreadstar``. The nature of dread star's gender is immaterial to the obvious fact that I am being subjected to a double standard of scrutiny and punishment because I don't have a second X chromosome. Or do you claim that this is also a ``fringe theory``? I hope this matter can be settled here without recourse to an appeal to higher scrutiny. And I want either my edit restored as a just and rightful response to this rather catty calumny, Or I want these feminine offenses to common manners to be equally expunged ``The Daily Mail presents Engstrom's theory that ``American-born Scott always believed they came from Asia across the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia`` As Ealdgyth points out with links to scientific literature, that assertion is simply patent nonsense and WP:FRINGE.`` ``The Daily Mail (such an expert source) also presents Engstrom's theory that there are ``fewer than 200 true Appaloosas left in the world``. That is also patent nonsense: The Appaloosa museum explains that there were about 200 officially registered Appaloosas in 1947. By 1978 there were 300,000 (living and deceased of course). Today there are 635,000. This breed isn't even close to ``rare.`` `` ``But Scott has often questioned this history because she thinks the numbers of spotted horses that were in the Pacific north-west part of America when [explorers] Lewis and Clark first made their way over the Rockies in the early 1800s didn’t quite tally with her experience of being a breeder. She said there were too many of them for that to be the case, so she’d always had this theory that maybe horses had come across the Pacific into America by a different route.`` ... THAT is a fringe theory. `` `	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
646,878,571	Thank you. Kombinator the great.	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
646,889,682	== Dead == Is she dead yet?	2,015	false	article	blocked	test	false
646,889,860	The third one isn't even Cher, it's Beyonce's mom I think.	2,015	false	article	blocked	train	false
646,893,984	` == Chetniks in Ukriane == Why have I been reverted three times when it comes to this fact? How can you revert someone for adding information that is true? Three times. Unbelievable, it's as if this is the new Uncyclopedia. Here are the sources: The only way that this is false is if these people are not people, but magic space lizards that are not real, like , and seem to believe. And if that's the case then, you better cite your sources. `	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
646,900,424	` ::Ok, so you are then telling the removal of sourced information is absolutely fine on Wikipedia and not vandalism. Does this mean I can highlight all the information in this article, press the backspace button on my keyboard and then get awarded a BarnStar? Makes sense, I'm going to try this magic formula on some articles, thanks for the advice! ::P.S You are a fucking idiot . `	2,015	true	article	blocked	test	true
646,901,997	:I'm retired, fuckers. Leave me alone.	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	true
646,905,913	== False accusations of vandalism == Falsely accusing another user of vandalism is disgraceful behaviour. Don't do it again.	2,015	false	user	blocked	test	false
646,907,590	` :::I am disgusted that falsely accused me of vandalism. I am even more disgusted that someone took their false claim at face value and blocked me. However, it is extremely pleasing to see that someone else undid the block so quickly. I am very grateful to you for that, . However, I cannot see which language might have been ``rough`` enough to cause him to undo my edit for no reason. I can't imagine any language rough enough to excuse that, and certainly not ``totally unnecessary link`` and ``already in the text``. :::Note that this user made their false accusation even after we had discussed the content issue and agreed a compromise; that was incredibly immature and vindictive. I saw that no-one had warned about false accusations of vandalism being damaging and disruptive, so I pointed it out to them. :::Well anyway, thanks again Sadads for undoing the block so promptly. `	2,015	false	user	blocked	train	false
646,927,862	` :I think WP:REDYES covers it. If an individual film could have its own article, then redlink it. Doesn't matter if that article is created tomorrow or 5 years from now. It's down to individual editors who think if a certain film is/isn't notable. Worst case is that the redlinks are removed now, but re-added if/when the missing film is created. '''''' `	2,015	true	article	blocked	test	false
646,928,045	` ::That was one hell of a party. '''''' `	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
646,928,989	`:``Can a redirect really be a primary topic?`` - Good question. I associate the topic title with the Metallica song. I think if you did a straw poll to music fans, most would also associate it with Metallica first. Looking at the article for the band, to me it doesn't meet the notability of a band. WP:BAND #5 states ``Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels``. This band has released only two albums, on a label that doesn't (yet) have its own article, hence not meeting this requirement. The current article shows the band existed, but doesn't really offer any WP:GNG. '''''' `	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
646,946,451	Otherwise, I'm unconvinced you should be editing in an area where you have a significant conflict of interest.	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
646,947,100	` *Oppose per my comments above. The song is the most likely outcome when searched for. '''''' `	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
646,951,033	::::I see that once again, [User:Cirt]] deleted my post from their talk page. I see that no-one else has warned them against lying to get other users blocked. It seems to me this kind of behaviour is tolerated and even encouraged.	2,015	false	user	blocked	train	false
646,951,882	Leave comments here. Thanks.	2,015	true	user	random	test	false
646,954,519	== Did you consent/were you aware == Did you consent to/were you aware of ?	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
646,959,305	` ::::::If you'll note, above I stated that I'd handle the forgotten logging situation. I did and provided the reasoning, as required, there. If I may ask, why do you seem have a cactus lodged up your ass? This editor was editing with an agenda in violation of the purpose of this site (and in an area covered by ArbCom Sanctions) and was clearly WP:NOTHERE to help build an encyclopedia. His being blocked was surely an improvement to the encyclopedia. Yet, you're jumping up and down about the fact that it was a particular block that was used (when NOTHERE, indef vandalism, or any of a myriad of other blocking reasons could have also worked). Jesus christ, give it a rest. Or take it to AE if you like unessecary drama. — // // // `	2,015	true	user	random	dev	false
646,961,936	\|listas=Hunchback of Notre Dame, The (1923)	2,015	true	article	random	dev	false
646,975,666	:No one produced sources, so I'm removing all mention of this topic.	2,015	true	article	random	train	false
646,980,090	This was resolved weeks ago with favor towards Cultural Marxism, but RGloucester (who, curiously, identifies as a marxist) has been shitposting for a solid month trying to block the article from being made, and the higher ups refuse to do anything about him even after his public temper tantrums on Jimbo's own talk page.	2,015	true	article	blocked	dev	false
646,981,002	== How could you??? == I was amazed to find out that you left the project even although your family supported you during Wikimania 2012, and while you were trying to get Ford Island to featured article class, and while you were heavily involved in some Wikipedia issue or another.I believe by leaving the project you've betrayed not only Wikipedia, but also your heroic family!	2,015	false	user	blocked	dev	false
646,999,865	*Support Disambiguation pages exist to serve as navigational aids for the reader. There's no strong argument that this is not the primary topic, and it would be hard to prove it is not considering the other potential pages have not yet been considered worth creating. As it stands this is one of many articles where the reader is best served by being directed to the only acutal existing page they could be looking for.	2,015	true	article	random	test	false
647,005,870	` :I'll look it over again. / `	2,015	true	user	random	test	false
647,020,948	== Moron == Leave Wikipedia. Your edits are stupid and contribute nothing.	2,015	false	user	blocked	test	true
647,021,209	== TV Seasons == You bullying people into not editing and threatening someone when they are explaining to you why your wrong will never help a situation. A full season refers to the number of episodes no when it airs like you think. Such as limited series are picked up for 8-10 episodes or The following or how to get away with murder for 15 episodes those are not full seasons and neither is a 20 episode order. CBS themselves announced that 22 or 24 episodes constitutes a full season any number less than that is not.	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,028,386	Hi I am your biggest fan!	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,047,876	I am telling the truth I am a fan of K6ka I did not know they even insisted or I would have not named myself K6ka2 but you could check my ip because my ip is not theres my ip is dynamic but I never used it ever.	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,056,188	==Tropic sun== Hi. I have saved the article for the moment by translating it into English. However, this is the English Wikipedia. The Danish Wikipedia is here. Also, by removing the maintenance templates, you made it take longer for the article to be translated so that it can possibly remain here, and as a matter of fact it was temporarily deleted as nonsense by an administrator. Instead of removing the templates, please note that I have now marked the article as possibly on a topic that is not notable according to our rules. These can be found here. Please add references to newspaper/magazine articles, TV coverage, etc. to show the band is notable, or the article will be deleted again.	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
647,100,093	:::We need an independent source to identify the prominence of the claim in the context of the biographical fame of Ken Ham. AiG is a sprawling behemoth of a website and picking one or two pages from its archives to highlight is inappropriate unless we can identify that those particular pages are relevant to Ham's biography. They aren't relevant simply on our say-so.	2,015	true	article	random	train	false
647,116,854	` ==Peacock words== WP:PEACOCK lays it out pretty clearly, and specifically mentions ``famous`` as a word to avoid. But people seem to wish to use this word, in one particular place only, in this article. The logic behind avoiding the word is very clear: it's subjective, and described what people might think about something rather than any objective fact about it. What is ``famous`` to you is not ``famous`` to me, and vice versa. So either we liberally add the word throughout every article, to describe anything that could be considered by anyone to be ``famous``, or we don't use it at all, unless it was used in a quote or other trivial exceptions. It was decided a long, long time ago that the latter option would be better, and this was written down in the manual of style. ``musicologist Joseph Kerman called it`` is objective, concise, and verifiable. ``musicologist Joseph Kerman famously called it`` contains no additional information, only puffery. Is there some reason why you think this one fact, in this one article, should be exempt from Wikipedia guidelines? `	2,015	false	article	blocked	train	false
647,119,762	` ::The talk page archive you linked to is not relevant, as it concerns the inclusion of the quote, not the use of the word ``famously``. Indeed, few things are banned on wikipedia, but there are very clear guidelines. Why do you think they shouldn't apply here? Why do you think that this one single fact needs to be described in this subjective way? If it was ``silly`` to describe the opera itself as famous, then you must believe that a critic's opinion of it could be more famous, and more widely described as famous, than the opera itself. That's clearly absurd. `	2,015	false	article	blocked	train	false
647,124,592	:Thanks for finding the book source. I had to reword the material partly because it was copied from the book. I also changed the wording otherwise and added the date of his death to the body. I left in your change from British to English, but the name of the hospital where he was declared dead is unimportant. Thus, I removed all references to that. I also eliminated the unreliable ancestry-type source. Book is good.	2,015	true	article	random	test	false
647,130,412	` ::::I do not see how it is relevant if sources use the word famous. We are never obliged to use the same words as any source. You can find a source claiming that almost anything is famous - it's hardly a rare case where lots of sources do so - so should we describe everything as famous? No, I tried that and it was rightly shot down. You can find a source - a famous one! - which says that this opera is a shabby little shocker. And those words aren't even listed as ones to avoid, so do we use them as if they are objectively true? Obviously not. ::::I don't believe the word is forbidden on Wikipedia, I already said that. But we have a guideline called ``words to avoid``. It doesn't say ``avoid these words, unless you really want to use them``, it doesn't say ``avoid these words unless you see them in external sources``, it says ``avoid these words, because they neither impart nor summarise verifiable information``. The guideline is very long established, and I see no sensible case for an exception here. `	2,015	false	article	blocked	test	false
647,139,783	` ::``The quote is known world-wide`` - sorry but that's nonsense. You talk like it's one of history's most significant utterances and that's plainly not true. The existence of the guideline is exactly to prevent this kind of absurd ``I think it's famous`` ``I think it isn't`` unresolvable nonsense. As for the context in which this quote is being used, it's in the introduction of an article in which its purpose is to illustrate that the opera was harshly described by some critics. The fame or otherwise of the quote couldn't be less relevant. ``musicologist Joseph Kerman called it`` contains all the necessary information. `	2,015	false	article	blocked	test	false
647,141,053	` ::I also note that, contrary to your claim, none of the four articles you posted describe the quote as ``famous``. The ``second Italian source which explictly describes it 'famous'`` is an extract of the first source; neither uses any Italian word for famous to describe the quote. Even if they did, that would be of little relevance, but why do you feel so strongly about this that you'd make a false claim like this? `	2,015	false	article	blocked	dev	false
647,142,255	:Thanks for your input. My arguments are over there. If you feel like considering something entirely different, I wonder whether you think it's a good idea to say what a hurricane was before saying what damage it caused? I do, but others seem not to.	2,015	false	user	blocked	test	false
647,154,669	:If they all contain badly written redundant text, then they all need correcting, don't they? I can't believe you're edit warring to force things that aren't even sentences into the article. Well, I guess some people have funny ways of enjoying themselves. If making articles look like primary school projects is your thing, then carry on.	2,015	false	user	blocked	dev	false
647,168,031	` February 2015 (UTC) : Thanks for the reminder; other priorities caught up to me this past week, but I am very sorry for inconveniencing you. I will check it out this evening. 23:05, 14`	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
647,177,565	How can it be less formal wording, when it is merely removal of information? It's called being more to the point. I've also noticed you haven't actually made any real content edits in your last 100 edits, which makes me think you are just looking for trivial reasons to revert.	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,191,176	` : Hey , before you attempt to make a pathetic case that it constitutes ``outing``, I would suggest you think long and hard about whether someone who voluntarily posts under their real name can be ``Outed`` for being who they, in fact, actually are. `	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
647,191,450	`And seriously, protip, ``Scalhotrod``, (geo identifier and hobby both closely associated with Bilzerian). If you want to guerrilla-manage your own WP page, tell your agent/rep/whatever to at least create a sockpuppet account that DOESN'T INCORPORATE HIS REAL NAME OR OTHER PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING INFO. `	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
647,205,937	`K, thanks for the tip. I did sign. ``Kombinator the great``. `	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,214,266	Requesting reversal on the basis that there is no rational, credible justification to be 'blocked' to begin with, seeing as I am 'harassing' nobody}}	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,214,372	, this block is just beyond petty and unjustifiable	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,228,626	==Thanks== Thank you for your input. Always encouraging with good feedback. Please take a look at the article Tina Leijonberg that I created yesterday. Regards,	2,015	true	user	random	test	false
647,234,590	` :::*Comment: It would be inaccurate but you might as well get rid of it and have yet another Wikipedia article containing glaring factual inaccuracies. Wikipedia has been taken over by POV pushers regarding anything that is even remotely related to Israel. How can an official Mobile government source be given stating that the city of Ariel, Israel - and not Ariel, an Israeli settlement in the West Bank - is a sister city of Mobile, Alabama, only for the latter to be placed in the article? Even when those words are not in the source given! For accuracy, the only fair thing to do is to put the flags back, list the city as ``Ariel, Israel`` with the Israeli flag in front of it, and add a note stating the contentious and/or disputed nature of the locality underneath it. `	2,015	false	article	blocked	train	false
647,254,525	` == Ace Combat 3 moving == Hi JamesofUR. Regarding your recent denial of the move request, you might want to be careful with letting that guy do as he wants around here. He's also the head admin of the Acepedia, an Ace Combat fan wiki, where he's amassed quite a reputation for being too dictatorial with the content there and even players in Ace Combat-related Facebook groups are irritated with this. Such a ``distinction`` can smack of COI in many cases - I wouldn't be surprised if the wiki contained much of the content our editors deleted from the various Ace Combat articles here years ago. Thanks for hearing me out. `	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,273,969	` : - instead of an abstraction, can you articulate just what I said that constitutes 'harassing' per the standard and plain use of the word 'harassing'? To be a better ``Wikipedian`` . `	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,278,117	::::We're not as close as we used to be. He's been preoccupied with Ukraine and I think he's jealous of my relationship with Obama.	2,015	true	article	random	dev	false
647,285,310	` *****Quote: ``Most of the sources we're using here are, but we're not using all the available reliable sources to their full weighted extent, either.`` I see this as a problem, honestly. There were reliable sources introduced by some, but they were immediately deleted and the diffs were later removed from the archives (removing evidence). The state of the handling of this article is deplorable at best, pernicious at worst. There are, in my honest opinion, too many editors with a horse in this race for anything productive to come out of the article. - `	2,015	true	article	random	test	false
647,322,870	135.23.145.164 NEEDS TO GOE DIE IN A HOLE	2,015	false	user	blocked	train	true
647,325,546	YOU LOVE OSAMA BIN LADEN SO DON'T DENY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,326,218	UNBAN ME RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	true
647,329,093	HOW DARE YOU DELETE MY SPI PAGE!!!!!!!!! BRING IT BACK RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,329,355	UNBLOCK ME RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!	2,015	true	user	blocked	test	false
647,329,429	IS AN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	true
647,329,628	::Jeepers, fellas, I'm a landscaper, I build fences, decks, water features and I care for trees'n'schrubs, I love computer programing, I breed Dogs, I have a lovely country farm I get to work on when ever I can. I Really, don't care, what you think of me. It has just been my experience, that the laws of science, don't just break, because some guy says so.	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
647,330,006	` :::``Gee, wouldn't that be nice!`` `	2,015	true	article	blocked	dev	false
647,332,043	` :Sure, I'll take a look when I next have a spare moment. Best — '''''''''' `	2,015	true	user	random	train	false
647,353,695	Your recent editing history at 2015 Chapel Hill shooting shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.	2,015	false	user	blocked	test	false
647,354,197	== Disruptive Editing == Your recent editing history at 2015 Chapel Hill shooting shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.	2,015	false	user	blocked	train	false
647,363,510	Priceless, High beam it. I Bow.	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,419,912	REDIRECT Talk:Harborough District Council elections	2,015	true	article	random	train	false
647,424,210	Uh.. mybee 240 Edits might also mean I am new... cf. proud +72,000 Edits!! et Dogma	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,424,420	` :: ``et`` = ``see that's how you get`` cf. EnglishJerk `	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,428,800	` :How charming. However, this ``loose cannon`` contacted the admin who first blocked you to verify you're not the IP and to reverse the lengthening of your block, and posted on ANI that your block should be shortened. I'm pleased to see it has been. I've started one ANI about you, not two. As for me being a disservice to Wikipedia, it's a subjective opinion so hard to say much. I happen to believe in science and academia and defend science against blind beliefs, whichever form they take. It does lead to accusations much worse than yours, including Palestinians calling me * Jew, Israelis calling me a * Arab, some Uzbek users calling me ccksu*ing Tajik and so on. People with extreme opinions who are here to right great wrongs are hard to please. `	2,015	true	user	random	test	false
647,429,953	*I'm blocked for this proposal. Can we investigate truths? Is mankind able to examine reality? We can't simply believe things which we feel pity for. Never mind, i lost hope for Wikipedia.	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
647,466,091	::The sources removed had been added by sockpuppets of a blocked user.	2,015	true	article	random	train	false
647,481,407	::You are saying David Leeming is fringe mythologist? is lying to defend his POV.	2,015	true	article	blocked	dev	false
647,481,806	::: is slandering the credentials of well accepted scientists, He is sounding like a Bigot, and a Liar. cf. Dogma, perhaps someone should look into his 72,000+ edits and see if his bigotry is leaking elsewhere.	2,015	true	article	blocked	train	false
647,484,958	` == Attacks == Sir, if I may, I apologize for ``attacking`` on the article [] page, I will repost my comment, with out any personal attacks but rather reference only to the people important to the article. :p.s. the user has been hat-ing and tag teaming with at least one other Wikipedia administrator, I believe this is WP:GAME and WP:BITE. It looks like the neat hat tricks'n deletes are attempts to silence views that are inconsistent with NeilN's POV. I am a Christian, I suspect him and they are not. An example of N's bigoted perspective comes from NeilN's own words ``You know no one will take your exhortations seriously when you state you believe in creation not evolution.``. The answer I got when Asked if a Dictionary is a good Ref. though not the first of many unanswered questions. Now, I do not agree with his point of view, but, I could use some help, if a comment only. Yours has been and would be Appreciated. `	2,015	true	user	blocked	train	false
647,486,154	` ::Can you offer a mythologist that takes a different perspective on proposed ``Big Bang Myth`` than Adam Leeming's, perhaps one Mythologist, that says, Neh? Why the funny hat?. `	2,015	true	article	blocked	test	false
647,488,596	Do these policies extend beyond the article(s) and their talk pages to user pages as well? Or are user talk pages free mans land?	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,492,103	signing about the loss of the	2,015	true	article	random	train	false
647,500,881	My email address is kaptinavenger@gmail.com	2,015	true	user	blocked	dev	false
647,512,916	`I've noticed that a lot of Wiki admins are rude and aggressive towards contributors who do not have ``admin status`` on Wikipedia. So here's a rant backed up by reliable ... `	2,015	false	article	blocked	test	false
647,512,957	` Search Results Wikipedia Admins Abuse \| Jess C Scott : Singapore Politics ... https://jesscscott.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/wikipedia-admins/ Nov 16, 2010 - I've noticed that a lot of Wiki admins are rude and aggressive towards contributors who do not have ``admin status`` on Wikipedia. So here's a rant backed up by reliable ... found on the net against you. Yep, Wikipedia sucks. Wikipedia Sucks \| Facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/Wikipedia-Sucks/146144242099701 Wikipedia Sucks. 65 likes. ... To connect with Wikipedia Sucks, sign up for Facebook today. Sign UpLog In .... Wikipedia Sucks - Best Wiki Ever. Funny, the one Wikipedia admin whose real-life identity I know … is now serving time for child ... Wikipedia Sucks - Best Wiki Ever bestwikiever.wikidot.com/wikipedia-sucks Mar 10, 2010 - Funny, the one Wikipedia admin whose real-life identity I know … is now ... There are Wiki-Nazi's and Wikipedia isnt a Wiki since only ``higher`` ... Why does wikipedia suck so much? - Yahoo Answers https://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=20100506025259AALnOYX May 6, 2010 - The opinion of a Teenage Mutant Wiki Admin means far more than that ... anyway, the reason Wikipedia sucks so badly is because only a very ... Why other people really hate Wikipedia administrators as well g-liu.com/.../why-other-people-really-hate-wikipedia-administrators-as-w... Sep 2, 2009 - ... Wiki's mods. So let's take a look at just why Wikipedia sucks quite so badly. .... WIKI[PEDIA] is entertainment for losers without a job. It's not an ... Why I really hate Wikipedia administrators \| The Thought Box g-liu.com/blog/2009/08/why-i-really-hate-wikipedia-administrators/ Aug 26, 2009 - Wikipedia administrators have turned Wikipedia into an online totalitarian ... On a Wiki such as Wikipedia, there are 3 tiers of users: Regular users, ... Some administrators have been so sucked in and addicted to this task that ... User:Paavo273/sandbox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paavo273/sandbox Paavo273 (2014): ``Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck.`` carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [30]: ``We make the Internet ... User:Premeditated Chaos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Premeditated_Chaos Indeed, I am a rouge admin to be feared. As an editor, I'm a ... This user has been helping the Internet not suck since 2003. ... This is a Wikipedia user page. Why Wikipedia sucks - Ryan Jones Blog - dotCULT.com www.dotcult.com/why_wikipedia_sucks/ Oct 19, 2006 - It's sad to see that wikipedia admins can go on power trips like this. .... Fine, I'll just get in and excise all my additions to date, so screw you Wiki. Why Does Wikipedia Suck on Science? \| WIRED www.wired.com/2007/05/why_does_wikipe/ May 11, 2007 - ... on Wikipedia. This was done through`	2,015	false	article	blocked	dev	false
647,513,174	` refracting telescope (from ``Smith's Illustrated Astronomy`` 1848).]] The 1845 Merz und Mahler 11 inch refractor – Housed in the ``Mitchel Building``. May be the oldest continually used telescope in the world. It is currently used for public education programs. The 1904 Alvan Clark & Sons 16 inch refractor – Housed in the ``Herget Building``. Used in public education programs and graduate research. wiki editors are a joke !! `	2,015	false	article	blocked	dev	false
647,513,272	Google Wikipedia Admins Abuse About 1,110,000 results (0.25 seconds)	2,015	false	article	blocked	dev	false
647,516,290	== Francis of Assisi == What is there to discuss? What discussion do you wish to have? The image i am in fvaor of is simply more contemporary. In case you dont know what that means, it means it is closer in time to the actual person i.e. the 13th century instead of the current picture/image which is 250years after his death. Thats my discussion.	2,015	true	user	blocked	test	false

646,758,272

For More Information Call 9971833242

2,015

false

user

random

train

false

646,765,569

:You reverted my work for no good reason. You left a dishonest edit summary. You deleted my post asking you why. And then you dare to accuse me of not wishing to be polite? Don't be such an idiot.

2,015

false

user

blocked

test

true

646,766,245

` :#Well yes, obviously. Quote boxes highlight quotes. But repeating text is obviously pointless. :#The page is not ``monotonous``. If you think it is, then it needs comprehensive rewriting. :#The quotes in the text already have in-line citations. :#The quotes are not key facts and do not need to be brought out. The choice of which lines to ``highlight`` in this way is entirely arbitrary. Also, we have guidelines which say As a matter of style, quoteboxes should generally be avoided... Instead of using quoteboxes to highlight its notability, explain its importance before introducing the quote or in an introduction to the quote. And let me once again reiterate the key point - the quotes are already in the text, and do not need repeating in boxes. :You're plainly not interested in actually discussing this, and I find your bald ``conclusion`` rather immature. I am also troubled by your initial dishonest edit summary, and your deletion of my post on your talk page asking you why you reverted my edit. `

2,015

false

article

blocked

train

false

646,766,308

` == Reverting for no reason == Hi. I see you undid edits I made, with the summary ``keep approp formatting from WP:GA version``. As I'm sure you're aware, that is an entirely meaningless edit summary. It was not formatting that I changed, and the fact that an article has a little green cross does not mean that it cannot be improved. So, if you had an actual reason for the revert, please state what it is. If you didn't, then please don't do that again. You're damaging the encyclopaedia. `

2,015

false

user

blocked

test

false

646,766,471

:Reverting my edit for no reason was very rude. Repeatedly deleting my posts asking you why you did that without having the courtesy to answer me is extremely rude. Accusing me of being impolite while deleting my question is extremely rude. Behaviour like yours is extremely damaging to the encyclopaedia. Why not just answer the question? Do you regard it as your right to revert for no reason or something?

2,015

false

user

blocked

train

false

646,768,646

== Size of Scythia valid citation removal == This additional geographic information and valid citation was added to this article: According to Oxford University authors Samuel Arrowsmith, B Fellowes and Luke Graves Hansard in their 1832 book A Grammar of Ancient Geography, Scythia had two parts, Scythia Intra Imaum and Scythia Extra Imaum both covering a combined area of 1,129,000 mi² or 2,924,096 km².. If you dispute the source please provide other reliable sources that dispute the claim in this book which fulfills the criteria for inclusion here: WP:Verifiability until then please leave the source in place until we reach WP:Consensus on its inclusion or exclusion thank you.

2,015

true

article

random

train

false

646,774,516

:The goal.com article is simply a reprint of the Rund article which you have already suggested three times. I have explained above why it isn't in the article. The fact that she has written a testimonial for the website of a fashion designer she likes is neither noteworthy nor encyclopedic. Again, this is something for her personal website, not an encyclopedia article.

2,015

true

article

random

test

false

646,792,586

:::Well, I don't see how adding text breaks up the supposed monotony of text, and I think if there is such monotony, it should be solved by editing the text, which I certainly think could be quite significantly shortened. But, as there will be no duplication of text, I think your suggestion would certainly be an improvement.

2,015

false

article

blocked

train

false

646,798,526

::But how can I do any of this? I only make edits, cite sources and upload images . I have no idea how to initiate a merge or what you just said. I'm Wiki-disabled. And now another damn article has been made in the past couple of days: Abdul Rauf (militant commander). Four articles on the same person.

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

646,800,558

` : You have just removed the notice regarding deletion. This is not the correct way to challenge the deletion: there's a big blue button that says ``contest this speedy deletion``. If you wish to challenge the request for deletion, please use that functionality. With that said, you page is clearly a self-promotional one, which is why it was previously deleted under a different name, and is very much in contravention of Wikipedia's policies. `

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

646,811,525

` == Hey, just a heads up, users arer allowed to remove active block notices per the ``clarification`` of WP:BLANKING. == `

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

646,811,904

` You need to stop canvassing. Posting at Editor Retention was one thing. Spamming all of the women's wikiprojects is another. That smacks of trying to influence the debate. If you are going to notify random groups just because they have ``women`` in the title, you need to do the same for men's groups. `

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

646,827,639

REDIRECT Talk:2015 Cricket World Cup officials

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

646,832,710

` Thank you for your help, Ched. I must point out that I had originally requested review of this dispute but was DIRECTED to continue discussing this before that could happen. See Transportman's note. I am no troll and would never addressed these people directly on my own. Thanks to your intervention, I can now proceed to pursue mediation as I originally wanted. Why is it that ``incivility`` is generally the accusation of people who have both hooves in the trough? I am grateful for Dreadstar's help in reaffirming that aphorism. On another note, I received three email message from Dreadstar that she had left me messages, but - being blocked- could not read them, nor do I see them here today. It is remarkable being admonished by infallible people. `

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

646,834,550

I just now received another email message from Ched that he has sent me a message sent 8 minutes after the first, yet I see none here. Where are these hidden messages? The world wonders...

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

646,840,004

Well-spoken. But if Darwin had followed it where would we be? I will guard my speech as best I can. I was offended because a 69 year old woman had ridden horseback over a 13,777 foot pass in Kyrgyzstan to find this information and she was being characterized as a meddling dupe by these people whose rice bowl is obviously threatened by what she found. I believe that St. Francis himself would have slapped those people silly.

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

646,842,831

Ms. Scott Angstrom of New Zealand at the age of 69 rode horseback over a 13,777 foot pass in the godforsaken mountains of Kyrgyzstan to find these horses. As such she has contributed more to the welfare of the Appaloosa breed than anybody I see talking here. It is a sad reflection on America that her efforts should be greeted with the denigration that I have found on this page.

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

646,859,077

*165.95.148.199 Vandalism only. — (Email)

2,015

true

user

random

dev

false

646,859,888

== Miz == Cut the shit, son. Stop reverting the changes before you are reported to the admins.

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

true

646,866,132

` The following quotes are taken verbatim from the Appaloosa talk page. They are made by editors who self identified themselves as female. To my knowledge they have never been admonished or cautioned for these very questionable remarks. I on the other hand find myself permanently blocked by ``dreadstar``. The nature of dread star's gender is immaterial to the obvious fact that I am being subjected to a double standard of scrutiny and punishment because I don't have a second X chromosome. Or do you claim that this is also a ``fringe theory``? I hope this matter can be settled here without recourse to an appeal to higher scrutiny. And I want either my edit restored as a just and rightful response to this rather catty calumny, Or I want these feminine offenses to common manners to be equally expunged ``The Daily Mail presents Engstrom's theory that ``American-born Scott always believed they came from Asia across the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia`` As Ealdgyth points out with links to scientific literature, that assertion is simply patent nonsense and WP:FRINGE.`` ``The Daily Mail (such an expert source) also presents Engstrom's theory that there are ``fewer than 200 true Appaloosas left in the world``. That is also patent nonsense: The Appaloosa museum explains that there were about 200 officially registered Appaloosas in 1947. By 1978 there were 300,000 (living and deceased of course). Today there are 635,000. This breed isn't even close to ``rare.`` `` ``But Scott has often questioned this history because she thinks the numbers of spotted horses that were in the Pacific north-west part of America when [explorers] Lewis and Clark first made their way over the Rockies in the early 1800s didn’t quite tally with her experience of being a breeder. She said there were too many of them for that to be the case, so she’d always had this theory that maybe horses had come across the Pacific into America by a different route.`` ... THAT is a fringe theory. `` `

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

646,878,571

Thank you. Kombinator the great.

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

646,889,682

== Dead == Is she dead yet?

2,015

false

article

blocked

test

false

646,889,860

The third one isn't even Cher, it's Beyonce's mom I think.

2,015

false

article

blocked

train

false

646,893,984

` == Chetniks in Ukriane == Why have I been reverted three times when it comes to this fact? How can you revert someone for adding information that is true? Three times. Unbelievable, it's as if this is the new Uncyclopedia. Here are the sources: The only way that this is false is if these people are not people, but magic space lizards that are not real, like , and seem to believe. And if that's the case then, you better cite your sources. `

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

646,900,424

` ::Ok, so you are then telling the removal of sourced information is absolutely fine on Wikipedia and not vandalism. Does this mean I can highlight all the information in this article, press the backspace button on my keyboard and then get awarded a BarnStar? Makes sense, I'm going to try this magic formula on some articles, thanks for the advice! ::P.S You are a fucking idiot . `

2,015

true

article

blocked

test

true

646,901,997

:I'm retired, fuckers. Leave me alone.

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

true

646,905,913

== False accusations of vandalism == Falsely accusing another user of vandalism is disgraceful behaviour. Don't do it again.

2,015

false

user

blocked

test

false

646,907,590

` :::I am disgusted that falsely accused me of vandalism. I am even more disgusted that someone took their false claim at face value and blocked me. However, it is extremely pleasing to see that someone else undid the block so quickly. I am very grateful to you for that, . However, I cannot see which language might have been ``rough`` enough to cause him to undo my edit for no reason. I can't imagine any language rough enough to excuse that, and certainly not ``totally unnecessary link`` and ``already in the text``. :::Note that this user made their false accusation even after we had discussed the content issue and agreed a compromise; that was incredibly immature and vindictive. I saw that no-one had warned about false accusations of vandalism being damaging and disruptive, so I pointed it out to them. :::Well anyway, thanks again Sadads for undoing the block so promptly. `

2,015

false

user

blocked

train

false

646,927,862

` :I think WP:REDYES covers it. If an individual film could have its own article, then redlink it. Doesn't matter if that article is created tomorrow or 5 years from now. It's down to individual editors who think if a certain film is/isn't notable. Worst case is that the redlinks are removed now, but re-added if/when the missing film is created. '''''' `

2,015

true

article

blocked

test

false

646,928,045

` ::That was one hell of a party. '''''' `

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

646,928,989

`:``Can a redirect really be a primary topic?`` - Good question. I associate the topic title with the Metallica song. I think if you did a straw poll to music fans, most would also associate it with Metallica first. Looking at the article for the band, to me it doesn't meet the notability of a band. WP:BAND #5 states ``Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels``. This band has released only two albums, on a label that doesn't (yet) have its own article, hence not meeting this requirement. The current article shows the band existed, but doesn't really offer any WP:GNG. '''''' `

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

646,946,451

Otherwise, I'm unconvinced you should be editing in an area where you have a significant conflict of interest.

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

646,947,100

` *Oppose per my comments above. The song is the most likely outcome when searched for. '''''' `

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

646,951,033

::::I see that once again, [User:Cirt]] deleted my post from their talk page. I see that no-one else has warned them against lying to get other users blocked. It seems to me this kind of behaviour is tolerated and even encouraged.

2,015

false

user

blocked

train

false

646,951,882

Leave comments here. Thanks.

2,015

true

user

random

test

false

646,954,519

== Did you consent/were you aware == Did you consent to/were you aware of ?

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

646,959,305

` ::::::If you'll note, above I stated that I'd handle the forgotten logging situation. I did and provided the reasoning, as required, there. If I may ask, why do you seem have a cactus lodged up your ass? This editor was editing with an agenda in violation of the purpose of this site (and in an area covered by ArbCom Sanctions) and was clearly WP:NOTHERE to help build an encyclopedia. His being blocked was surely an improvement to the encyclopedia. Yet, you're jumping up and down about the fact that it was a particular block that was used (when NOTHERE, indef vandalism, or any of a myriad of other blocking reasons could have also worked). Jesus christ, give it a rest. Or take it to AE if you like unessecary drama. — // // // `

2,015

true

user

random

dev

false

646,961,936

|listas=Hunchback of Notre Dame, The (1923)

2,015

true

article

random

dev

false

646,975,666

:No one produced sources, so I'm removing all mention of this topic.

2,015

true

article

random

train

false

646,980,090

This was resolved weeks ago with favor towards Cultural Marxism, but RGloucester (who, curiously, identifies as a marxist) has been shitposting for a solid month trying to block the article from being made, and the higher ups refuse to do anything about him even after his public temper tantrums on Jimbo's own talk page.

2,015

true

article

blocked

dev

false

646,981,002

== How could you??? == I was amazed to find out that you left the project even although your family supported you during Wikimania 2012, and while you were trying to get Ford Island to featured article class, and while you were heavily involved in some Wikipedia issue or another.I believe by leaving the project you've betrayed not only Wikipedia, but also your heroic family!

2,015

false

user

blocked

dev

false

646,999,865

*Support Disambiguation pages exist to serve as navigational aids for the reader. There's no strong argument that this is not the primary topic, and it would be hard to prove it is not considering the other potential pages have not yet been considered worth creating. As it stands this is one of many articles where the reader is best served by being directed to the only acutal existing page they could be looking for.

2,015

true

article

random

test

false

647,005,870

` :I'll look it over again. / `

2,015

true

user

random

test

false

647,020,948

== Moron == Leave Wikipedia. Your edits are stupid and contribute nothing.

2,015

false

user

blocked

test

true

647,021,209

== TV Seasons == You bullying people into not editing and threatening someone when they are explaining to you why your wrong will never help a situation. A full season refers to the number of episodes no when it airs like you think. Such as limited series are picked up for 8-10 episodes or The following or how to get away with murder for 15 episodes those are not full seasons and neither is a 20 episode order. CBS themselves announced that 22 or 24 episodes constitutes a full season any number less than that is not.

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,028,386

Hi I am your biggest fan!

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,047,876

I am telling the truth I am a fan of K6ka I did not know they even insisted or I would have not named myself K6ka2 but you could check my ip because my ip is not theres my ip is dynamic but I never used it ever.

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,056,188

==Tropic sun== Hi. I have saved the article for the moment by translating it into English. However, this is the English Wikipedia. The Danish Wikipedia is here. Also, by removing the maintenance templates, you made it take longer for the article to be translated so that it can possibly remain here, and as a matter of fact it was temporarily deleted as nonsense by an administrator. Instead of removing the templates, please note that I have now marked the article as possibly on a topic that is not notable according to our rules. These can be found here. Please add references to newspaper/magazine articles, TV coverage, etc. to show the band is notable, or the article will be deleted again.

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

647,100,093

:::We need an independent source to identify the prominence of the claim in the context of the biographical fame of Ken Ham. AiG is a sprawling behemoth of a website and picking one or two pages from its archives to highlight is inappropriate unless we can identify that those particular pages are relevant to Ham's biography. They aren't relevant simply on our say-so.

2,015

true

article

random

train

false

647,116,854

` ==Peacock words== WP:PEACOCK lays it out pretty clearly, and specifically mentions ``famous`` as a word to avoid. But people seem to wish to use this word, in one particular place only, in this article. The logic behind avoiding the word is very clear: it's subjective, and described what people might think about something rather than any objective fact about it. What is ``famous`` to you is not ``famous`` to me, and vice versa. So either we liberally add the word throughout every article, to describe anything that could be considered by anyone to be ``famous``, or we don't use it at all, unless it was used in a quote or other trivial exceptions. It was decided a long, long time ago that the latter option would be better, and this was written down in the manual of style. ``musicologist Joseph Kerman called it`` is objective, concise, and verifiable. ``musicologist Joseph Kerman famously called it`` contains no additional information, only puffery. Is there some reason why you think this one fact, in this one article, should be exempt from Wikipedia guidelines? `

2,015

false

article

blocked

train

false

647,119,762

` ::The talk page archive you linked to is not relevant, as it concerns the inclusion of the quote, not the use of the word ``famously``. Indeed, few things are banned on wikipedia, but there are very clear guidelines. Why do you think they shouldn't apply here? Why do you think that this one single fact needs to be described in this subjective way? If it was ``silly`` to describe the opera itself as famous, then you must believe that a critic's opinion of it could be more famous, and more widely described as famous, than the opera itself. That's clearly absurd. `

2,015

false

article

blocked

train

false

647,124,592

:Thanks for finding the book source. I had to reword the material partly because it was copied from the book. I also changed the wording otherwise and added the date of his death to the body. I left in your change from British to English, but the name of the hospital where he was declared dead is unimportant. Thus, I removed all references to that. I also eliminated the unreliable ancestry-type source. Book is good.

2,015

true

article

random

test

false

647,130,412

` ::::I do not see how it is relevant if sources use the word famous. We are never obliged to use the same words as any source. You can find a source claiming that almost anything is famous - it's hardly a rare case where lots of sources do so - so should we describe everything as famous? No, I tried that and it was rightly shot down. You can find a source - a famous one! - which says that this opera is a shabby little shocker. And those words aren't even listed as ones to avoid, so do we use them as if they are objectively true? Obviously not. ::::I don't believe the word is forbidden on Wikipedia, I already said that. But we have a guideline called ``words to avoid``. It doesn't say ``avoid these words, unless you really want to use them``, it doesn't say ``avoid these words unless you see them in external sources``, it says ``avoid these words, because they neither impart nor summarise verifiable information``. The guideline is very long established, and I see no sensible case for an exception here. `

2,015

false

article

blocked

test

false

647,139,783

` ::``The quote is known world-wide`` - sorry but that's nonsense. You talk like it's one of history's most significant utterances and that's plainly not true. The existence of the guideline is exactly to prevent this kind of absurd ``I think it's famous`` ``I think it isn't`` unresolvable nonsense. As for the context in which this quote is being used, it's in the introduction of an article in which its purpose is to illustrate that the opera was harshly described by some critics. The fame or otherwise of the quote couldn't be less relevant. ``musicologist Joseph Kerman called it`` contains all the necessary information. `

2,015

false

article

blocked

test

false

647,141,053

` ::I also note that, contrary to your claim, none of the four articles you posted describe the quote as ``famous``. The ``second Italian source which explictly describes it 'famous'`` is an extract of the first source; neither uses any Italian word for famous to describe the quote. Even if they did, that would be of little relevance, but why do you feel so strongly about this that you'd make a false claim like this? `

2,015

false

article

blocked

dev

false

647,142,255

:Thanks for your input. My arguments are over there. If you feel like considering something entirely different, I wonder whether you think it's a good idea to say what a hurricane was before saying what damage it caused? I do, but others seem not to.

2,015

false

user

blocked

test

false

647,154,669

:If they all contain badly written redundant text, then they all need correcting, don't they? I can't believe you're edit warring to force things that aren't even sentences into the article. Well, I guess some people have funny ways of enjoying themselves. If making articles look like primary school projects is your thing, then carry on.

2,015

false

user

blocked

dev

false

647,168,031

` February 2015 (UTC) : Thanks for the reminder; other priorities caught up to me this past week, but I am very sorry for inconveniencing you. I will check it out this evening. 23:05, 14`

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

647,177,565

How can it be less formal wording, when it is merely removal of information? It's called being more to the point. I've also noticed you haven't actually made any real content edits in your last 100 edits, which makes me think you are just looking for trivial reasons to revert.

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,191,176

` : Hey , before you attempt to make a pathetic case that it constitutes ``outing``, I would suggest you think long and hard about whether someone who voluntarily posts under their real name can be ``Outed`` for being who they, in fact, actually are. `

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

647,191,450

`And seriously, protip, ``Scalhotrod``, (geo identifier and hobby both closely associated with Bilzerian). If you want to guerrilla-manage your own WP page, tell your agent/rep/whatever to at least create a sockpuppet account that DOESN'T INCORPORATE HIS REAL NAME OR OTHER PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING INFO. `

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

647,205,937

`K, thanks for the tip. I did sign. ``Kombinator the great``. `

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,214,266

Requesting reversal on the basis that there is no rational, credible justification to be 'blocked' to begin with, seeing as I am 'harassing' nobody}}

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,214,372

, this block is just beyond petty and unjustifiable

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,228,626

==Thanks== Thank you for your input. Always encouraging with good feedback. Please take a look at the article Tina Leijonberg that I created yesterday. Regards,

2,015

true

user

random

test

false

647,234,590

` :::*Comment: It would be inaccurate but you might as well get rid of it and have yet another Wikipedia article containing glaring factual inaccuracies. Wikipedia has been taken over by POV pushers regarding anything that is even remotely related to Israel. How can an official Mobile government source be given stating that the city of Ariel, Israel - and not Ariel, an Israeli settlement in the West Bank - is a sister city of Mobile, Alabama, only for the latter to be placed in the article? Even when those words are not in the source given! For accuracy, the only fair thing to do is to put the flags back, list the city as ``Ariel, Israel`` with the Israeli flag in front of it, and add a note stating the contentious and/or disputed nature of the locality underneath it. `

2,015

false

article

blocked

train

false

647,254,525

` == Ace Combat 3 moving == Hi JamesofUR. Regarding your recent denial of the move request, you might want to be careful with letting that guy do as he wants around here. He's also the head admin of the Acepedia, an Ace Combat fan wiki, where he's amassed quite a reputation for being too dictatorial with the content there and even players in Ace Combat-related Facebook groups are irritated with this. Such a ``distinction`` can smack of COI in many cases - I wouldn't be surprised if the wiki contained much of the content our editors deleted from the various Ace Combat articles here years ago. Thanks for hearing me out. `

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,273,969

` : - instead of an abstraction, can you articulate just what I said that constitutes 'harassing' per the standard and plain use of the word 'harassing'? To be a better ``Wikipedian`` . `

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,278,117

::::We're not as close as we used to be. He's been preoccupied with Ukraine and I think he's jealous of my relationship with Obama.

2,015

true

article

random

dev

false

647,285,310

` *****Quote: ``Most of the sources we're using here are, but we're not using all the available reliable sources to their full weighted extent, either.`` I see this as a problem, honestly. There were reliable sources introduced by some, but they were immediately deleted and the diffs were later removed from the archives (removing evidence). The state of the handling of this article is deplorable at best, pernicious at worst. There are, in my honest opinion, too many editors with a horse in this race for anything productive to come out of the article. - `

2,015

true

article

random

test

false

647,322,870

135.23.145.164 NEEDS TO GOE DIE IN A HOLE

2,015

false

user

blocked

train

true

647,325,546

YOU LOVE OSAMA BIN LADEN SO DON'T DENY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,326,218

UNBAN ME RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

true

647,329,093

HOW DARE YOU DELETE MY SPI PAGE!!!!!!!!! BRING IT BACK RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,329,355

UNBLOCK ME RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2,015

true

user

blocked

test

false

647,329,429

IS AN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

true

647,329,628

::Jeepers, fellas, I'm a landscaper, I build fences, decks, water features and I care for trees'n'schrubs, I love computer programing, I breed Dogs, I have a lovely country farm I get to work on when ever I can. I Really, don't care, what you think of me. It has just been my experience, that the laws of science, don't just break, because some guy says so.

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

647,330,006

` :::``Gee, wouldn't that be nice!`` `

2,015

true

article

blocked

dev

false

647,332,043

` :Sure, I'll take a look when I next have a spare moment. Best — '''''''''' `

2,015

true

user

random

train

false

647,353,695

Your recent editing history at 2015 Chapel Hill shooting shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

2,015

false

user

blocked

test

false

647,354,197

== Disruptive Editing == Your recent editing history at 2015 Chapel Hill shooting shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

2,015

false

user

blocked

train

false

647,363,510

Priceless, High beam it. I Bow.

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,419,912

REDIRECT Talk:Harborough District Council elections

2,015

true

article

random

train

false

647,424,210

Uh.. mybee 240 Edits might also mean I am new... cf. proud +72,000 Edits!! et Dogma

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,424,420

` :: ``et`` = ``see that's how you get`` cf. EnglishJerk `

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,428,800

` :How charming. However, this ``loose cannon`` contacted the admin who first blocked you to verify you're not the IP and to reverse the lengthening of your block, and posted on ANI that your block should be shortened. I'm pleased to see it has been. I've started one ANI about you, not two. As for me being a disservice to Wikipedia, it's a subjective opinion so hard to say much. I happen to believe in science and academia and defend science against blind beliefs, whichever form they take. It does lead to accusations much worse than yours, including Palestinians calling me *** Jew, Israelis calling me a *** Arab, some Uzbek users calling me c*cksu**ing Tajik and so on. People with extreme opinions who are here to right great wrongs are hard to please. `

2,015

true

user

random

test

false

647,429,953

*I'm blocked for this proposal. Can we investigate truths? Is mankind able to examine reality? We can't simply believe things which we feel pity for. Never mind, i lost hope for Wikipedia.

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

647,466,091

::The sources removed had been added by sockpuppets of a blocked user.

2,015

true

article

random

train

false

647,481,407

::You are saying David Leeming is fringe mythologist? is lying to defend his POV.

2,015

true

article

blocked

dev

false

647,481,806

::: is slandering the credentials of well accepted scientists, He is sounding like a Bigot, and a Liar. cf. Dogma, perhaps someone should look into his 72,000+ edits and see if his bigotry is leaking elsewhere.

2,015

true

article

blocked

train

false

647,484,958

` == Attacks == Sir, if I may, I apologize for ``attacking`` on the article [] page, I will repost my comment, with out any personal attacks but rather reference only to the people important to the article. :p.s. the user has been hat-ing and tag teaming with at least one other Wikipedia administrator, I believe this is WP:GAME and WP:BITE. It looks like the neat hat tricks'n deletes are attempts to silence views that are inconsistent with NeilN's POV. I am a Christian, I suspect him and they are not. An example of N's bigoted perspective comes from NeilN's own words ``You know no one will take your exhortations seriously when you state you believe in creation not evolution.``. The answer I got when Asked if a Dictionary is a good Ref. though not the first of many unanswered questions. Now, I do not agree with his point of view, but, I could use some help, if a comment only. Yours has been and would be Appreciated. `

2,015

true

user

blocked

train

false

647,486,154

` ::Can you offer a mythologist that takes a different perspective on proposed ``Big Bang Myth`` than Adam Leeming's, perhaps one Mythologist, that says, Neh? Why the funny hat?. `

2,015

true

article

blocked

test

false

647,488,596

Do these policies extend beyond the article(s) and their talk pages to user pages as well? Or are user talk pages free mans land?

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,492,103

signing about the loss of the

2,015

true

article

random

train

false

647,500,881

My email address is kaptinavenger@gmail.com

2,015

true

user

blocked

dev

false

647,512,916

`I've noticed that a lot of Wiki admins are rude and aggressive towards contributors who do not have ``admin status`` on Wikipedia. So here's a rant backed up by reliable ... `

2,015

false

article

blocked

test

false

647,512,957

` Search Results Wikipedia Admins Abuse | Jess C Scott : Singapore Politics ... https://jesscscott.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/wikipedia-admins/ Nov 16, 2010 - I've noticed that a lot of Wiki admins are rude and aggressive towards contributors who do not have ``admin status`` on Wikipedia. So here's a rant backed up by reliable ... found on the net against you. Yep, Wikipedia sucks. Wikipedia Sucks | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/Wikipedia-Sucks/146144242099701 Wikipedia Sucks. 65 likes. ... To connect with Wikipedia Sucks, sign up for Facebook today. Sign UpLog In .... Wikipedia Sucks - Best Wiki Ever. Funny, the one Wikipedia admin whose real-life identity I know … is now serving time for child ... Wikipedia Sucks - Best Wiki Ever bestwikiever.wikidot.com/wikipedia-sucks Mar 10, 2010 - Funny, the one Wikipedia admin whose real-life identity I know … is now ... There are Wiki-Nazi's and Wikipedia isnt a Wiki since only ``higher`` ... Why does wikipedia suck so much? - Yahoo Answers https://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=20100506025259AALnOYX May 6, 2010 - The opinion of a Teenage Mutant Wiki Admin means far more than that ... anyway, the reason Wikipedia sucks so badly is because only a very ... Why other people really hate Wikipedia administrators as well g-liu.com/.../why-other-people-really-hate-wikipedia-administrators-as-w... Sep 2, 2009 - ... Wiki's mods. So let's take a look at just why Wikipedia sucks quite so badly. .... WIKI[PEDIA] is entertainment for losers without a job. It's not an ... Why I really hate Wikipedia administrators | The Thought Box g-liu.com/blog/2009/08/why-i-really-hate-wikipedia-administrators/ Aug 26, 2009 - Wikipedia administrators have turned Wikipedia into an online totalitarian ... On a Wiki such as Wikipedia, there are 3 tiers of users: Regular users, ... Some administrators have been so sucked in and addicted to this task that ... User:Paavo273/sandbox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paavo273/sandbox Paavo273 (2014): ``Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck.`` carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [30]: ``We make the Internet ... User:Premeditated Chaos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Premeditated_Chaos Indeed, I am a rouge admin to be feared. As an editor, I'm a ... This user has been helping the Internet not suck since 2003. ... This is a Wikipedia user page. Why Wikipedia sucks - Ryan Jones Blog - dotCULT.com www.dotcult.com/why_wikipedia_sucks/ Oct 19, 2006 - It's sad to see that wikipedia admins can go on power trips like this. .... Fine, I'll just get in and excise all my additions to date, so screw you Wiki. Why Does Wikipedia Suck on Science? | WIRED www.wired.com/2007/05/why_does_wikipe/ May 11, 2007 - ... on Wikipedia. This was done through`

2,015

false

article

blocked

dev

false

647,513,174

` refracting telescope (from ``Smith's Illustrated Astronomy`` 1848).]] *The 1845 Merz und Mahler 11 inch refractor – Housed in the ``Mitchel Building``. May be the oldest continually used telescope in the world. It is currently used for public education programs. *The 1904 Alvan Clark & Sons 16 inch refractor – Housed in the ``Herget Building``. Used in public education programs and graduate research. wiki editors are a joke !! `

2,015

false

article

blocked

dev

false

647,513,272

Google Wikipedia Admins Abuse About 1,110,000 results (0.25 seconds)

2,015

false

article

blocked

dev

false

647,516,290

== Francis of Assisi == What is there to discuss? What discussion do you wish to have? The image i am in fvaor of is simply more contemporary. In case you dont know what that means, it means it is closer in time to the actual person i.e. the 13th century instead of the current picture/image which is 250years after his death. Thats my discussion.

2,015

true

user

blocked

test

false