First of all, since nobody's done it yet, welcome to Wikipedia! Secondly, thank you much for the information you provided here on Heather O'Rourke; that was something I'd been looking for for some time! You appear to be off to an excellent start, but if you have any questions, please feel free to drop in at my talk page and lemme know! — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 14:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, in a case like this, where the page has been subject to repeated vandalism by anonymous ip I would recommend taking the case to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. I see you are relatively new to Wikipedia, if you would like I can walk you through the process or if necessary I could just file the report myself. Best of luck. - Schrandit (talk) 21:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, I've been a bit distracted recently.

• On your first point about the blog/website of the subject of an article - from Wikipedia:BLP#Using the subject as a self-published source and Wikipedia:RS#Statements of opinion - in short, you can use someone's blog/website for statements that they have made but not as actually new sources. For example, you can use John Smith's website to prove that John Smith thinks that hats are silly, you cannot use John Smith's website to prove that John Smith is the world's greatest scholar on hats.
• On reversions - one can revert multiple abusive edits by a single editor to a single article with Rollback. You can ask any administrator to grant you Rollback, administrators have expressed a particular willingness to examine rollback applications) or you can apply here.

I hope this helps, please let me know if you have any other questions. - Schrandit (talk) 19:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your work at Mufti Ebrahim Desai you maybe interested in this wonderful organization which helps build and save articles facing deletion:

Hello, Fragma08. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Ikip (talk) 22:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well, we welcome you if you decide to join. Best wishes. Ikip (talk) 03:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've been through this before. Sadly the rules are not evenly enforced, if you have not edited long enough or made enough wikicronies to take your side, you will lose any battle you take on, even if you were clearly right and had the diffs to prove the violation you alleged. Seriously, it's not worth getting getting too upset over, some of these editors spend their whole life on wikipedia, levelling up and recruiting new guild members; if you have a life outside WP, it's best just not to get too drawn in to the drama. Best wishes Little Professor (talk) 23:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

oops, sorry, I thought I'd retrieved those changes. I'm sure I copied and pasted and pressed Save... Rd232 ^talk 18:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe I've removed any references.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irshad_Manji&action=historysubmit&diff=366431989&oldid=366412446

It just says I did because I moved them around.

Otherwise, my edits still read better. Things on wikipedia read so much like advertisements these days. If you look at the wikipedia page for any school or college, they sound like they're selling themselves through wikipedia. The pages of living people, especially c-list celebrities like Manji, suffer the same disease.

174.54.92.106 (talk) 11:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making a personal attack in your first edit after a WP:NPA block. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really fail to see how I made a personal attack. I replied to various attacks made on me clarifying, and yet I am blocked? Everything I wrote is true and I do feel this block is unwarranted and uncalled for. There is no merits unless you believe that the personal attacks, backbiting and claims made against me are true - thus encouraging incivility, while keeping me from defending myself by stating the facts. Fragma08 (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Your obsession...is disturbing and unhealthy" is a personal attack under just about any definition you care to use. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Considering you are willing to completely disregard the blatant abuse and personal attacks (under WP:NPA, I have been subjected to over the last course of days, ranging from bad to worse and when I call out the an obsession with my person, you block me. It is an obsession and of the unhealthy kind, when one edits mainly to provoke, single out and claim falsehood about editors citing conspiracy like hidden motives. There are no constructive edits. Yet you only seem to be only concerned with me. They can pretty much carry on in no unclear terms. Also you have made a point of advertising my block in te talk thread of an article rather than keep it limited to my talkpage. I see where this is going and it is beyond justifiable or fair. Policies should apply to all. But clearly it does not from these events. Fragma08 (talk) 19:10, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if you want to appeal your block, go right ahead -- I've been overturned before. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No point, as I realize, some users are protected and have a carte blanche to act anyway they like including breach of established policies. I naively assumed policies applied to all without bias. Fragma08 (talk) 19:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]