You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block[1] is 24 hours William M. Connolley 17:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
You were blocked for 3RR and using sockpuppets. I could have made that last bit somewhat clearer, I'll admit. William M. Connolley 19:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
If you think anyone else has broken WP:3RR then please feel free to report them, once your block has expired. Also... why aren't you talking here? You can edit this page William M. Connolley 19:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
I am new to this place. I wasn't sure how the messaging process worked. I didn't know that anyone would read what I put here, and on a site on which your name was mentioned it suggested e-mailing you.
If you already know that KarlBunker is blatantly breaching the rules, why don't you take action against him now ? Rule breaking is rule breaking.
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I've asked you repeatedly not to re-insert copyrighted text into Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I've blocked you for 24 hours as a way of getting the point across and avoiding pointless reverts. If you re-write the text in your own words (text is copyrightable; ideas are not), then you can try and add it to the article and it will be judged on its factual merits. This is non-negotiable, this is a simple matter of standard policy in regards to Wikipedia content, and you will get the best results if you do not choose to interpret this through some ridiculous conspiracy theory against you, which it is not in the slightest.
I am an academic historian, I am not an "American nationalist", and I do not have any stake in defending the bombings themselves, and I do resent your casting of everyone who disagrees with you -- either on content points or copyright points -- as being part of some sort of censorship activity. It is not true, for the one point (read the talk pagediscussion and you will see that there are a multitude of different opinions), and it is not good faith editing. Take a little break, think about the best way to get what you want done, and then try again tomorrow. --Fastfission 19:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
You misquoted copyright law that you obviously know next to nothing about.You misquoted Wikipedia rules. You couldn't contradict my criticms of your inadequate reasoning, so you block to get the point across. The only point you get across is that you are intolerant, illogical and ignorant about what you falsely claim to know about. An academic historian. That's a joke. I have read some of the useless rubbish you have added. You are no more an academic historian than you are a copyright lawyer. You have no qualifications whatsoever in Japanese history, yet you interfere in a site concerning it. You lived or even live in America. Of course you are prejudiced. You wrote that you resented me for other reasons ! Even the prejudiced fool themselves that they are impartial. Reading what you have written elsewhere you are typically biased in what you write. You have been subjected to U.S. views cooncerning this subject. I've not claimed there is a "ridiculous conspiracy theory". You've made that up. There are some Americans on this site who can not stand the thought that their beloved country dropped atomic boms on civilians without achieving what they intended. Find somebody who strongly disagrees with what I have added that doesn't or hasn't lived in America. Strange coincidence that you can't. Given that the reasons for trying to censor historical facts change from one reason to another it is obvious that they are not genuine reasons. Not referenced one person claimed. I added references yet he still reverted. It should be in the discussion section one person claimed. I put it in the discussion section, yet he still reverted. You are the worst of all. You start misquoting copyright law, which you know nothing about. When you find you're wrong you try to misinterpret and twist copyright law.If your concerns were really genuine you would amend what I had added to comply with your uneducated view of copyright law. I have nothing but contempt for you. --Emperor Hirohito 21:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
Then you might as well not try and edit on here. Myself and others have made good attempts to explain our objections to you and explain the problems with your actions, and you've responded with nothing but insults. That is not the way things are done on Wikipedia, and it is not the way to get your point across. You don't know for a minute what my views are concerning this subject, so please don't overgeneralize. Expressing nothing but a disinclination to work with others will result in your eventual permanent blocking. If you have any interest in continuing to edit here, please consider acting like an adult. --Fastfission 01:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Regarding Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. ≈ jossi ≈t • @ 22:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. ≈ jossi ≈t • @ 22:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
If you continue to re-insert copyrighted text from another webpage, you will be permanently blocked.
You have two options here. One is to re-write the facts in your own words and try and lobby for that to be in the article. I don't necessarily agree with everything you probably want to add but that's an entirely different issue and I'm happy to talk about it with you.
Or, you can try and re-insert the same text and try to claim that you know copyright law better than everyone else on here. At which point I will have you permanently blocked as a persistent poster of known copyrighted material to which you do not own the copyright.
You are subject to Wikipedia's policies if you want to be a participant. Below every editing window says "Content must not violate any copyright." A little further down the page it says "Only public domain resources can be copied without permission." It is pretty straightforward. The reason for these policies is simple -- Wikipedia's content servers are located in the United States and are subject to U.S. copyright law. So obviously we don't allow anything which would violate U.S. copyright law.
So it's up to you. I think I've been pretty clear, very patient, and put up with nothing but endless abuse and insinuation from you. You can follow the really quite simple rules, take up the clear and relatively easy alternative approach (rewriting the text yourself), or you can get blocked. It's completely up to you, but this is really pretty close to your final warning on this. --Fastfission 03:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This account has been blocked indefinitely for edit warring and offensive username. With your areas of interest and modus operandi reflecting those of General Tojo and Parkinsons I have little doubt that you are the same person. You are risking permanent banning for sockpuppetry, personal attacks, 3RR violations and offensive usernames. JFW | T@lk 15:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
