User talk:20I.170.20

Ebaumsworld has nothing to do with "sysop". Stop reverting my edits. A troll added that. Check your facts, dammit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.76.177 (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remain clam, 85.225.76.177. As I discussed with User:Apagul, "another" user who added the link to AnonTalk, the addition of AnonTalk is not the main concern I have but the removal of the link to Ebaumsworld. What makes you think that link was added by a troll? At the very least you should not remove one link and replace with another, especially a link to a deleted article. Also note that it would appear that this issue is escalating into a small edit war, as the same revision has been reverted numerous times by many different editors [1] [2] [3] [4]. I personally have reverted it only twice, and I will not revert again. Please also have a read of the Three-revert rule if someone else removes it again. 20I.170.20 (talk) 16:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zzuuzz, I noticed here you reverted the link to AnonTalk added by 85.225.76.177. I did the same thing earlier, but the user responded here and I wasn't sure if I'd done the right thing. Just to clarify, was I right to revert? Thanks. 20I.170.20 (talk) 12:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Absolutely, and I will hopefully be backing you up with insta-bans. For context see the IP's contributions and virtually every entry in my recent logs[5] (as well as several hundred previous ones) and this Google search. I also strongly recommend that the current sentence is either supported by independent references or removed. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's insane, and I see from this google search that it's a problem for a number of websites. I'll definitely try and help out if I see it anywhere else, though I think you've got the ref desks covered. 20I.170.20 (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy for the following reason: It looks like an IP address and could confuse or mislead other users. It may disrupt the encyclopedia building process. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

• If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
• If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
• You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Thank you. ...... Dendodge .. Talk^Contribs 21:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond on my talk page. If I do not receive a reply, I will report you at WP:UAA. I am giving you chance to explain your username before I take action...... Dendodge .. Talk^Contribs 11:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dendodge. I have considered your opinion carefully, but I have to disagree with you. I have read the username policy, both before I created this account and just now, and I do not believe this username can in any way disrupt the encyclopedia building process. At the very worst I might be mistaken for an Ip address by some, but in all likely hood I will be the only one facing disruption, as anon users are often disregarded in discussions and treated as potential vandals. I understand your concerns, and that is why I deliberately did not create a userpage so that my contributions would show up red in the history and recent changes logs, to show others than I am not an Ip address. 20I.170.20 (talk) 14:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine by me, but you might want to change it to avoid further confrontation...... Dendodge .. Talk^Contribs 14:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will consider it. 20I.170.20 (talk) 14:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 01:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]