User talk:205.240.146.233

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your test on Fouke Monster worked, and has been removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. FunPika 18:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was NO test. I was placing a SOURCE. Can this Warning be removed? 205.240.146.233 (talk) 19:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, you could always just take out the section. However, I think FunPika's warning was not a mistake, so I would let it stand. IceUnshattered (talk) 14:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I asked Cluebot how it could find any obscenities. I am NOT doing any vandalism, etc. at all. I'm trying to find out how the Bot works. Please bear with me. And could some Admin remove that warning from above? 205.240.146.233 (talk) 05:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have found out that my edits proving that there are people who will shoot anything has been reverted and that I have been mistaken for someone else. I met the person who gave me some interesting links which someone on here said those links was "silly", spam, and the like. They prove that there are people who will shoot at anything that moves, which could get someone killed. 205.240.146.233 (talk) 19:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know the person. 205.240.146.233 (talk) 19:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• http://www.lawnflowersjerkyandbigfoots.com/bigfootshootings.aspx - General shooting reports, incl. by police
• http://www.highdesertbigfoot.com/Shooting-Cases.htm - Police shoot at Bigfoot

Am after more proof about people shooting at Bigfoot. 205.240.146.233 (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC) :)[reply]

• Your edits amount to a novel synthesis from published facts. Wikipedia is here to publish verifiable fact, not "The Truth™". If you continue as you are, you will likely be blocked from editing. Guy (Help!) 20:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent hoax in Georgia has people asking about other people shooting at Bigfoot. Appreciate the help. 205.240.146.233 (talk) 20:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why are "pro-paranormal" sources, the ones that say Bigfoot is real, that UFOs and aliens are paying us a visit considered "unreliable"? I've been elsewhere on the Internet, even listen to Coast To Coast AM, Jeff Rense's radio show, and you would'nt believe what is said about Wikipedia(hint: It is'nt anything good). Again, thanks for helping me. 205.240.146.233 (talk) 03:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How are these evaluated for reliability? 205.240.146.233 (talk) 03:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is using bad language a cause for a block, a ban? Seen this around the place. What are other causes for these, so I don't end up making a horrible mistake? 205.240.146.233 (talk) 03:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on circumstance, language may result in a block and persistently disruptive editing may result in a permanent ban. Edit usefully, in line with the community norms that have been repeatedly made clear to you, and there won't be a "horrible mistake". — Lomn 03:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]