User talk:Butterrum

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. BishopTutu 03:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. BishopTutu 15:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, if you two are truly 2 different people, why do you spell "believe" like "bealve" exactly like each other? BishopTutu 23:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't try to sock puppet. This is the exact same person who is disagreeing with me in the talk page. This is illegal and can get you blocked. I'd stop if I were you. BishopTutu 03:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was an article about Vercetti's rank but it was deleted on the discussion. Craxy 22:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit other people's comments, as you did at Talk:List of gangs in Grand Theft Auto series. It is considered vandalism, and you may be Blocked from editing Wikipedia if you continue in this manner. Even if you don't like their opinion, please be civil and remember that they are entitled to it.

♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 23:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't play stupid. And DO NOT add BS to the "GTA list of gangs" page. BishopTutu 02:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is hilarious; man, just stop it now, please. BishopTutu 03:05, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's the matter? Why did you get so quiet? BishopTutu 03:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not cyber bullying. You're breaking rules by constantly reverting and sockpuppeting, so you can go ahead and quit that. BishopTutu 19:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who said the other user was Puerto Rican? Also, I thought he was Dominican? BishopTutu 23:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, man, PLEASE do not start again. All I'm trying to do is help the "List of Gangs" article, but you're making that unnecessarily hard. I'm not racist, and the only reason I agree with what some people say is because it's RIGHT; either I already knew it, or I checked up on it, before agreeing. Don't play the "race card" just because something isn't going your way. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit me § Contributions} ♣ 21:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, the Vecetti Gang is a major criminal organization in Vice City, not La Cosa Nostra. Craxy 23:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got evidence or proof if they're a Mafia family? Craxy 05:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes i do--Butterrum 11:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE do not touch the article. If people begin to war again, the page will become locked down again. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit me § Contributions} ♣ 17:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being understanding. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 19:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting in the "List of Gangs" page. If people continue to war, it will cause unwanted attention to the page, which could lead to an AfD. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 18:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that the Stallionz are a smaller part of the Biker Gang, so there is really no need to put "Stallionz" in the title. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 03:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This Klptyzm boy is ruining everything Craxy 18:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's just putting capitals on "family". He is stalkin people. I once made a page and he demanded it to be deleted. He makes me sick to the stomach! Craxy 22:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This dude is a pest. He won't leave anybody alone. He deleted the so-called "laundry lists". He thinks he Mr. Perfect Craxy 06:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm such an unhelpful pest, Craxy, then why did I help you figure out how to sign your edits (which, need I remind you, took a good 35 minutes)? Whatever. Like I said on your page, you shouldn't hear from me again. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 06:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He won't mess with our edits anymore. just you don't revert mine ok? Craxy 06:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your comments about "Claude Speed," I never agreed that GTA2 Claude is GTA 3 Claude; my statements in the GTA 4 talk page were about a unnamed character I saw in the Rockstar official page; now, pertaining to you and Craxy's conversations about me, I'd very much appreciate it if BOTH of you would come and talk to me DIRECTLY if you have a problem, rather than bicker amongst yourselves like little school children. It's been going on a while, and I'd like it to stop (even though both of you will probably just get mad and start to attack me and continue to talk about me anyway). ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 00:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ignore you're unnecessarily hostile remarks and only respond to your question about "the unknown guy," go back to the GTA IV talk page and click the link I provided. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 02:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you call me "Don"? ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 02:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I didn't know apologizing meant "I'm going to talk about you behind your back, just because something is going on that I don't like." And also, just because I have the intelligence to actually spell out and capitalize my words doesn't mean I'm "prepy," as you so cutely misspelled. It means I actually have half a brain. I just felt you should know that. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 05:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you can leave the Stallionz. But don't change the Vercetti gang to Vercetti Mafia Craxy 20:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is craxy, I changed my name Craxy 23:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now don't change it to Leone crime family Craxy 23:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was GTARex, I changed it back to craxy Craxy 23:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page wouldn't be considered for deletion if it wasnt for that bastard Craxy 22:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's ruined the page! Craxy 00:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That pest. I was Wikipedian before him. He thinks he's smart 66.214.9.77 21:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 20:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to your comments on Talk:Grand Theft Auto IV: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 20:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 20:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never saw that, and I still don't. Also, concerning the "List of gangs"...

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to List of gangs in Grand Theft Auto series. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 20:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding the information at the Grove Street Families, Ballas, Los Santos Vagos and Varrios Los Aztecas comparing them to other gangs in the series. Unless you can find a source, which is unlikely. Also, the information is of no use to the article itself. A-Dust 20:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reply, although I did not understand a word of it. The reason the content was firstly removed by Klptyzm and then by myself is because it contributes nothing to the article or the purpose of the article (to give a brief description of each gang along with key members and activities). Once the content has been removed again, which I am sure it will (I am doing an assignment now and thus won't be removing it myself), please do not re-add it. The page has not been locked for a while now, and I am adding references to stop the AfD requests and moans that the article is not referenced. Your content is not verifiable and will thus only allow complaints on the article to continue. A-Dust 21:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for adding unsourced material to the GTA Gangs Page. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

I have also semi-protected this page for 2 weeks to prevent IP vandalism. TimVickers 21:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got myspace?

Oh, my goodness, man. You guys are really going to talk about me on MySpace? HAHAHAHAAH. This is so unreal man. You guys are the most immature people I have ever seen in my life. My 12 year old cousin has more maturity than either of you will ever have. Haha, oh my goodness, man. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 02:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. This is regarding [1], [2] and [3]. Please follow the guidelines WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. x42bn6 Talk 03:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, the above template does not mention anything about being arrested. x42bn6 Talk 04:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't warn you for racial reasons. I warned you because you were provoking that person and using incivil language. I don't care what the issue is with the article or the user - but unless you stay civil, your arguments are almost void, and you will be blocked if you continue. It's not an evil policy and argue all you want - after all, if you are civil, you have nothing to worry about. That said, I think you do - you should honestly consider WP:DR, rather than vent your anger and annoyance to another member. Keep cool. x42bn6 Talk 04:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I don't see any edits by the user in question to your userpage claiming you are racist, for the past 100 edits made by him. x42bn6 Talk 04:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, fair enough, this user has supposedly said "I hate blacks/hispanics". I would like to know where. As I have said before, no edits made to your userpage suggest he is racist within his last 100 edits. Therefore I would like to know where. x42bn6 Talk 04:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, racism isn't tolerated whatsoever on wikipedia. Second, personal attacks is against the rules here on wikipedia. If you do not stop, I will be forced to report you to the administrators which they will take the proper action they deem to be fair and helpful to the community. ViriiK 04:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True, and I do think there is a problem that this user has encountered: No original research. You should substantiate your claims with a source should you wish to add a new claim or statement - and I believe you are annoyed that User:Klptyzm has reverted your changes? All I can say is that I suggest you give me a Wikipedia:diff of the edit you are annoyed with (or User:TimVickers, who has been dealing with the article too), so that we can work on a compromise. I'm going to bed now so I'll leave this issue alone - but remember, stay civil. x42bn6 Talk 04:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't contributed anything to these articles. I just simply give advices towards people, nothing more. It's just degrading to see in the community of Wikipedia. ViriiK 04:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 name 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! HagermanBot 04:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did here: Grand Theft Auto IV. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Talking about us "hating" and using our "prep voices," which you have used in the past to antagonize me, is a personal attack, and I suggest you stop, please. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 21:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These aren't threats; these are warnings. Also, if a discussion on a talk page has nothing to do with the article or if a discussion has personal attacks, the discussion can be removed, so what I have done is not vandalism. Please just follow Wikipedia's rules. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 15:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not lying, and if this is supposed to give out some so-called "information," why don't you and the others get some sources for this discussion? Then you can gladly continue with it. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 15:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I won't use "ghetto slang" because I'm intelligent enough not to use it; I also do not talk in real life the same way I do on Wikipedia, so I'd ask you kindly to end this harrassment. Thank you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 18:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't remember, then it's wise to just let it go. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 04:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't threaten you; the most I could ever do, anyway, is warn you. I said "it would be wise" because I'm not, and never will be, in the mood for unnecessary conflict. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 04:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 19:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: User_Talk:BillPP. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. I did not once call you "queer". Also I did not delete anything, I archived the GTA4 talk page. I am not vandalising pages or deleting your sources. Please calm down --BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt your claims of knowing "lots of people that are blocked because of me. I'd tell you to calm down, but I've told you plenty of times and it hasn't worked. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 22:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 21:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First off, "frauding" isn't a word; I think you mean "deceiving," which is not what I'm doing. You're deceiving people by lying and saying that people have talked about your mom and have used racial slurs against you, which I find totally dispicable. You just need to calm down and behave like a normal human being. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 02:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is becoming increasingly childish, which is why I choose to ignore you, for today. Good day to you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 02:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that Craxy brought it on himself. It's up to him now. I can't see any personal abuse against you here; if you can show me diffs, I can look into it. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, other editors have been very patient with you, while you've come very close to being blocked for your personal attacks on them. Again, if you can give diffs showing personal attacks on you, I'll look into it. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 09:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To bring up issues of "corrupt" Administrators, see WP:RfC. The closest to the owner of Wikipedia is User:Jimbo Wales but there is no need to go that far. Do you mind telling me what this is about, too? x42bn6 Talk 13:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm p'gta'p. I understand you're having a little trouble with some users. I'm here to solve things that are vandelized, people who don't understand edits. Come at me if you feel bothered. Ptpgta 23:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a need to bring another person into this? Either way, I am not a sysop. x42bn6 Talk 11:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to give this a break. You are being disruptive by throwing around corrupted allegations (even calling me a corrupted sysop when I am not a sysop and I don't believe I have engaged in "corruption" on Wikipedia, if that is possible). So I am just going to make this frank: What is your complaint, provide Wikipedia:Diffs for evidence, and stop being disruptive. x42bn6 Talk 14:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong. I treat all things equally. But I have not filed a checkuser request because I don't think it warrants it. But if you don't wish to file a complaint, then you should also stop being disruptive. Looking at the edits here, I am not surprised of the blocking at all. You have to cool it, quite honestly, and accept the fact that something simple has got out of hand. Lest a request for comment is filed, which is detrimental to everyone, I suggest that you leave this issue alone. After all, you don't want to file a complaint, so is there any use in pursuing this issue any further? x42bn6 Talk 14:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect so too, but I helped him because you were harassing him (look at the mess on his talk page that was caused). Either way, see Talk:List of gangs in Grand Theft Auto series#Biker gang meet Stallionz for my comment on the issue - this is the problematic one. x42bn6 Talk 14:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said before, give me evidence and not just statements. If you don't have any, please stop causing problems for other users. We are here to make an encyclopedia, not throw around mindless statements. x42bn6 Talk 14:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He did not break 3RR. He did 3 reverts in over 24 hours - nowhere near 3RR's boundaries. 3RR's boundaries are 4 reverts in 24 hours. And a checkuser request is not required to block for sockpuppetry. And it can be argued that checkuser requests do not fully establish sockpuppetry either. x42bn6 Talk 14:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said before, you don't need a checkuser request to determine sockpuppets. The sysop dealing with the sockpuppeteering determined they were the same user and blocked them. x42bn6 Talk 15:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Talk:Grand_Theft_Auto_IV. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Klptyzm, you will be blocked from editing. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 02:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you for extremely disruptive editing and incivility. If, when the block expired, you are prepared to edit Wikipedia article and interact with other editors sensibly and according to our policies and guidelines, then you'll be most welcome. If, on the other hand, you continue wioth the same sort of behaviour, then blocks will become longer, and may be made indefinite. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't dare warn me when I haven't even broken a rule. That will get you blocked again and I suggest you stop. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 15:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can go ahead and stop with your warnings. I haven't broken any rules and incorrectly warning me CAN and WILL get you blocked again. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 17:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your block doesn't seem to have taught you anything about editing cooperatively and civilly. This is your last chance before you receive another, longer block: start to behave in an appropriate way to other editors, don't issue them with warnings that are neither justified nor backed up by anything, start discussing your controversial edits rather than just reverting. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 18:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could I ask you to stop reverting this article until we solve the dispute on the talk page? Thanks; let's get it over and done with. x42bn6 Talk 14:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the 3RR rule doesn't give you the right to three reverts; if you revert the article again, you'll be blocked for edit-warring. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 15:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 04:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All this can be resolved if you simply resolve from personal attacks; calling me a "haza" is totally unnecessary. Perhaps you should come at me with a certain degree of maturity and all this will be resovled. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 13:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove warnings from your talk page. You're going down the exact road Craxy did, and it got him permanently blocked. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 18:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We know they're a Mafia family, but it doesn't need to add crime in the name. LAcfm 15:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, you make all this ruckus about talking behind people's back, yet you go and do it. Look, I've told you before and I'll tell you again: the second you stop unnecessarily harassing me is the second we both can go on and edit in peace. And also, like I've told you before again, I agree with what other people suggest if it's correct. I don't just jump up and say "OK!" to every single thing that is suggested. To tell you the truth, I'm still having second thoughts about including the PIGs or the VC Triads, but I've decided to let other people decide, since I don't really care about it anymore. In the end, just chill out with all of this "Klp is harassing me" nonsense; the quicker you stop all this childishness, the quicker this can be enjoyable again. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 18:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Butterrum, I don't know anything about starting a section or an article, or how to upload pictures. Anyway, this whole thing is getting out of hand, so I propose that we drop trying to make a section for the PIG's, and besides, the idea is not supported very much by other Wikipedia users, so I think we should abandon this idea. The Architect 01 18:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 name 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! HagermanBot 15:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the majority of the complaints about you I had have already been covered here, so I'm going to mention your keyboarding. You need to improve, right now. no ones likes reading sentenses like this i mrean realy it makes you look unprofesional no one will take you seariously you look very unkredible. I realize that a complaint about your keyboarding seems a little unprofessional in itself, but I think I speak for a great number of people when I say I'm sick and tired of trying to interpret what you type. Take the extra time and type properly; it's not difficult. -- Torvik 04:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's definately not because you can't spel, or don't know English well enough. You mispell words that were already written in the comments before yours. --70.143.52.3 12:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed your attacks on Torvik, someone who is only tryin' to help you.... Please stop the personal attacks and just try to be reasonable. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 21:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What confuses me is why Butterrum is editing on the English Wikipedia when s/he can quite obviously barely use the language. Whatever language s/he speaks natively certainly has its own language version. Torvik 00:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This amounts to little more than personal attacks, and isn't acceptable; please stop. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 12:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could help, but I'm not an admin (maybe someday). You can enter a request yourself on WP:AIV. Grika 19:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks like this and this are totally unacceptable. I've blocked you from editing for a week, as your earlier two blocks seem to have had no effct. When the block expires, please try to behave better. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you still don't understand Wikipedia. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 16:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, just leave me alone. I'm not in the mood for this immaturity. That IP is you and you and I know that. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 16:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're talking about so leave me alone bimbo. Sean mc Sean 17:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will recieve. The next time you vandalise an article or User Page, as you did to User:Sean mc sean, you will be banned. ≈ The Haunted Angel 14:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask you kindly not to vandalism my talk page again. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 03:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you even know what a sockpuppet is??? If you do, then who could I possibly be a puppet of? ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 04:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, go look at this page to see that this is my new user name. My old name was BishopTutu; it's now Klptyzm. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 04:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add sockpuppet tags to userpages without concrete proof that they are indeed puppets/puppeteers (eg CheckUser, similar disruption patterns, etc). If you believe a user is a disruptive sock, consider alerting WP:AIV, WP:ANI or one of the administrators. Otherwise your tagging may be considered disruption. – Riana ^ऋ 04:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've been blocked from editing for two weeks for persistent disruption, including the baseless adding of a sock-puppet template to another editor's User page. When you return, please try to edit accoridng to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and the normal standards of good manners. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]