Anonymous IP editors

Hi Sempi. On the subject of anonymous IPs editing, it is a very complicated subject! IP addresses can be banned, but usually aren't as different people can share an IP. So if you ban one person, you might actually be banning several, including innocent parties. To be honest I'm not an expert on the subject, have a read at Wikipedia:Blocking policy if you're looking a fuller explanation.

I tried clicking on the links you added and my work server denied access. So I'm assuming people with parental controls couldn't access them either. Regarding the other person who removed my link to youtube, this seems to be a new policy and one I don't fully understand. But what I think the reasoning is that videos uploaded to youtube may be copyrighted and youtube provides no information as to whether they are copyrighted or not. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, both in our own articles and external links provided in articles. So linking to any of the fight videos is going to be difficult I think. Maybe inserting some text in the article stating that "the videos are available widely on the internet, on sites such as youtube and sublimedirectory" is best. I hope you're not put off editing. There are a lot of things about Wikipedia that annoy me too, mostly around copyrights too actually. More specifically around uploading images, which is a total minefield!

By the way, I added your signature in. If you end your talk page comments with four "tides" ( the ~ symbol it adds your username. It helps people to know who's saying what! Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia and I hope you stay. I'll post this on your talk page as well. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 12:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Natural born citizen clause of the U.S. Constitution. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

I understand you're upset at what you see as censorship at Natural born citizen clause of the U.S. Constitution, but please don't resort to personal attacks and accusations of vandalism. That's not going to help your case. If you feel you're not getting an honest consensus, please file an request for comment so other editors can also offer opinions. If you think something is going on that violates policy here, you'll need to back that up with DIFFs showing the edits in question. In any case, your report at the edit-warring board won't be acted upon, so it's best to just let that go. Good luck! Dayewalker (talk) 06:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an accusation, it's a fact. Weazie is deleting whole sections of referenced sources from multiple contributors in the article without consensus. Sempi (talk) 06:41, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If that's what you feel is happening, then either please continue the discussion on the talk page and try and gain consensus, or find the diffs and file a report at one of the noticeboards. That's the best way to handle things. Dayewalker (talk) 06:44, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]