User talk:Fighting for Justice

Tidy up

If you make a mistake such as archive box, please tidy up after yourself with {{db-author}}. -- RHaworth 08:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Block

I have blocked both you and User talk:196.15.168.40 for edit warring at David Westerfield. When this block expires, you may discuss changes on the talk page of the article, as it has been protected. If you wish to appeal this block, use {{unblock}}.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Wrestlemania 23

this is going to be so much better than 7, but not as good as 13 or 5, so im not sure if its notable ;) the_undertow ^talk 06:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Removing unreferenced tags

Please do not remove {{unreferenced}} tags, as you did at Ryan White, unless you are prepared to provide references. As I see it, that article has only one source, which is listed at the bottom but which does not in any way indicate what portion of the content comes from that source. That is not acceptable. | Mr. Darcy talk 02:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Steve Moore

Hi Fighting. I get your point regarding Moore's popularity, however the incident was one of the very few incidents in hockey history that resulted in an off-ice investigation and a lengthy ban. I believe it is warranted enough to be included in the article. Please check out the page Wiki_is_not_paper. I am removing your warning after this misunderstanding has been cleared up, but I am putting the information back into the article. If you would like to bring this to Mediation, please leave me a message on my talk page and I'll be glad to help :). Thanks! Kntrabssi 14:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

The Steve Moore incident is not indiscriminate information, something such as total goals scored for the franchise would be indiscriminate information. The Steve Moore incident is something important, much like the Marty_McSorley incident and the Boston Bruins. I have class until 5:30, but I will list this at mediation afterwards! Thanks :-) Kntrabssi 13:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Getting back to this, as a member of the cabal (if it exists...), I wish to list there first. If you are unhappy with the results, we can bring it to the more formal mediation. Thanks :) Kntrabssi 00:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi FFJ, I've opened a case with the cabal, you can check it out here.  :)Kntrabssi 03:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Mike Mizanin

My fault, the edit history, the way I read it, showed that you removed a legit picture of Mike Mizanin, I should have gone further back. Please accept my humble apologies for this error. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 02:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Dedrick Owens

I don't care about your personal opinions about Dedrick Owens. What matters is that Wikipedia's policies for biographies of living people is followed. If you reinsert that material or otherwise violate WP:BLP, I will block you per the policy: "Administrators may enforce the removal of such material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked." Sarah 06:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

BLP block

I've blocked you for 24 hours for violating BLP after I gave you two clearly and serious warnings that you would be blocked if you persisted. Your first edit to my talk page was fine but your second, in which you went back to assert that a minor was a murderer despite a lack of conviction or charges, was obviously a very clear violation of WP:BLP and WP:POINT. I have no objections to your expression of you opinion of me and if that's what you think, well that's okay. However, what isn't okay is you persisting in violating our policy on biographies under the rather disingenuous pretence of following consensus. You were rather insistent that the anonymous editor follow WP:CON and repeatedly cited it, yet you refuse to follow BLP, our most important content policy. I have only blocked you for a day, please take that as a very serious warning because if you decide to persist further with BLP violations, future blocks will be much longer. This is serious and you need to realise that. Sarah 08:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

hey!

Hi fighting for justice! I'm just wondering if you'd like to team up with me so that we can make the Michael Jackson article a better place. My mission is to cleanse it of garbage, and I'd like it if you would aid me in finding all the negative trash about Michael, in the references and things, and notify me of them. I understand if you're too busy fighting for justice elsewhere in wikipedia, but I really believe that Michael Jackson deserves his article to be non-biased. I still remember that time you agreed with me about the King of Pop heading, and guess what? It's IN!!! That's what hard work and a little determination gets! Cheers, mate!--Paaerduag 11:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)