User talk:Simonm223
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Simonm223, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Thanks!
Thank you for helping me with clarifying the information in Piguaquan. It's appreciated. Angie Y. (talk) 02:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I am oonly using one account. I am at work and we all share an IP address. I've been auto-blocked because of soemthing done by one of my co-workers. Please consult my contribution history to demonstrate I am not a sock puppet.
[edit] Sockpuppetry case
If you know the user involved with the sock puppetry case, it would be preferable if you asked him nicely to refrain from making unconstructive edits. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 17:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have already done so on a few occasions. My concern is mainly for those of us who have experienced blocks because of this who have not been making unconstructive edits. Simonm223 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- What IP address is being blocked? The block on 64.201.173.189 appears to have been lifted. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 17:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- What other users have experienced blocks? - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 17:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I experienced a block which I successfully had removed. The person who I was blocked for IP sharing with was in turn blocked because his account is suspected of being a sock puppet for the individual you blocked for sock puppetry. I don't know if he has been contributing constructively or not but he is a distinct person, not a sock puppet. Furthermore two other users who have declined to create accounts for unstated reasons (likely apathy) and have not been able to access edit features because of the IP block. Simonm223 (talk) 17:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Some interesting facts:
- You are editing from two IP addresses both registered to your employer but seemingly leased from two different ISPs. Of course that could be a mistake in the whois registry.
- Jrsmcmillan and Jimboss69 edit from both of your IP addresses.
- The only users to edit from 64.201.173.189 on May 28 and 29 are yourself, Jrsmcmillan and Jimboss69. So I'm not clear on who might have been caught in any autoblock besides yourself.
- Call me crazy, but I think you are responsible for those accounts, and if you really want to not trigger autoblocks at work, you should probably not create throaway vandal accounts when you're bored. You should probably take your own advice. Thatcher 21:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Koolaid?
What koolaid does The Epoch Times mix?--Asdfg12345 18:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Solicitation of false testimony as propaghanda against a state opposed to the alternative religious group that funds it.Simonm223 (talk) 19:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
What false testimony are you referring to?--Asdfg12345 21:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Persecution of Falun Gong
This article has been around for over three years, has undergone hundreds of revisions, and has lots of references, demonstrating that it it a notable topic. I removed your proposed deletion tag, because it was totally inappropriate, given that the proposed deletion process is for "uncontroversial deletions", which this clearly would not be. Your arguments of lack of neutrality would be more appropriately taken up on the article's talk page.--Michig (talk) 11:49, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- We don't delete articles because one editor doesn't like them. Use the talk page to gain consensus for dealing with what you perceive to be a lack of neutrality in the article. If the consensus view does not agree with your own, learn to live with it.--Michig (talk) 12:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Falun Gong articles
See [1], a very insightful look onto the FLG articles on wikipedia.--PCPP (talk) 11:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Your AN3 report
Regarding this addition to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: that is not what this noticeboard is for. It's only to report individuals who are violating Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. If you are looking for input about what to do with the content of the article, you can try WP:Third opinion, Editor assistance, or asking for help at WT:WikiProject China. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- In all honest you may be better off bringing the matter to attention at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, and perhaps later through arbitration. I have made some comprehensive suggestions on the noticeboard today, I urge you to read it, but I have been told to go to Arbitration. The phenomenon you are reporting (edit warring) has gone on for several years now. You will not solve it through just simple reporting. Colipon+(T) 22:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Honduras
I strongly recommend that you take part in mediation for the current dispute. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/2009_Honduran_coup_d'état --Conor Fallon (talk) 02:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Mediation
You have not shown it was inappropriate, 4 others have agreed to mediation, it is you and one other that do not agree, look at the talk page, look how long it is, it needs some sort of mediation, I saw the first poll only after putting up mine, then I requested mediation. --Conor Fallon (talk) 19:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, the poll that I put is at 6-5 right now, with the majority for crisis. --Conor Fallon (talk) 19:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- Negative, you are just trying to stall, this is a current event, and needs mediation immediately. --Conor Fallon (talk) 19:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- There is a consensus that it is a crisis, as nobody, even people who believe it is a coup, denies that it is a crisis, there is a large minority that believe it was a coup. It should be at the more neutral name. Current events don't wait a week, and it should be at crisis, because NPOV extends to the title. Read the wiki policies I have posted on the talk page. --Conor Fallon (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- Negative, you are just trying to stall, this is a current event, and needs mediation immediately. --Conor Fallon (talk) 19:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] July 2009 Urumqi riots
What was this revert for? I don't necessarily oppose it because it's similar to my own wording from earlier. But right before your edit, another editor removed that very sentence and gave a rationale, so it's not good to revert like this without even giving an edit summary. Please explain at the talk page (the relevant section is at the bottom of the talk page right now) so that this doesn't turn into an edit war. Thanks, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 20:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Barnstar
 |
The Ürümqi Barn"star" | |
| Thanks for all your work maintaining the article July 2009 Ürümqi riots during its time on the main page. This has been a difficult and thankless task, working at a frenetic pace for 4 days straight so far (I, for one, have been getting very little sleep), and it's only been thanks to coordinated efforts and discussion from numerous editors that the article has been kept as neutral and informative as possible. This is the most collaboration I've done, with the largest number of editors once, since I have joined Wikipedia, and I think the results are showing; while it's not perfect, when my friends and family ask me about what's going on in Urumqi, I have been more comfortable recommending this article than any other source. The work is far from over, but now that this article is off the main page I think it's finally time to thank the editors Seb az86556, Colipon, Jim101, Ohconfucius, Benlisquare, Simonm223, and Jinhuili for all their contributions; while we had disagreements, I think each of these editors has been particularly active and has made real efforts to improve the article.rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 20:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC) |
[edit] You've been mentioned at WP:AN3
See the result of this 3RR case regarding your edits at Teachings of Falun Gong. EdJohnston (talk) 04:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
