User talk:Seb az86556/archive27

Just to clarify

Sebz, I see you reverted my edit - just wanted to clarify the context of the change . "Banned" is something applicable only to mainland China - thought we must either present so accurately, or avoid the adjective. Please kindly let me know your thoughts on it. Regards, Dilip rajeev (talk) 20:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prior edit warrior

Dear Sebz, you had warned in August user Jingiby about his edit war regarding the St. Naum article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jingiby#August_2011). He's at it again (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saint_Naum&action=history): 07:59, 11 September 2011 08:02, 11 September 2011 08:18, 11 September 2011

You may want to consider a block this time around.

Wisco2000 (talk) 08:32, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't have the block button for English wikipedia, so I cannot do that... on the other hand, you are quite heavily reverting, too, so consider WP:BOOMERANG before reporting. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 12:51, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About SPI

Hi, Seb az86556. I want to ask a question. It's very clear that those users' purpose is same.

Inclinations of three of them are similar. But I don't think they are similar to Andreas. If I open SPI, in which page do I have to use ? Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 11:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This one... look at the archive, quite educational, or to start a completely new one, go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. By now "connecting the dots" is difficult... there are so many dots. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 12:53, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Murder_of_James_Craig_Anderson#Requested_move

Since you voted "keep" in the AfD, and what the AfD meant is in discussion, I though I would let you know about it Talk:Murder_of_James_Craig_Anderson#Requested_move.--Cerejota If you reply, please place a {{talkback}} in my talk page if I do not reply soon. 05:25, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew McKenzie

Dear Sebz, your comments on the discussion for the page "Matthew McKenzie" were harsh, I am Matthew McKenzie, you should Google: Celebrity chef Matthew McKenzie, celebrity chef Outback Matty. There is more then enough information on the internet to support my article. I was working on my page to establish a public article about me and my career. You did not give me the oppertunity to correct my page, instead you removed all content in the first 12 hours of post. I am not using the page for self addvertsiment just purely as a reference for the public to follow and add to. Yes I can admit to making mistakes in 2010 and abusing Wikipedia not uderstanding the correct code of practice which I did violate. How am I suposed to build an article when Wikipedia will not help support me? Not everyone is perfect, I was once disdavantaged, I am now stepping up to the ladder and moving forward with my life.

Here is a challange, if you believe you are so good at Wiki editing then please except my challange and build a basic article around "Matthew McKenzie".

Kind Regards, Matthew McKenzie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipedia151 (talk • contribs) 10:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Easy: do not lie by misrepresenting sources, do not make yourself more important by adding fluff, and most importantly, do not use more than one account — we can check this via IP-tracking and this leads to your accounts and any future accounts being blocked. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 17:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]