User talk:Zanoni666

Welcome!

Hello, Zanoni666, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -999 00:04, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Rosicrucian Order of A+O)

Please make up your mind what the title of the article should be. Also, please observe WP:CIVIL. You cannot exclude an editor from editing an article. Also, if you are a member of the Order in question, it is not proper for you the edit the article per WP:AUTO. Please feel free to educate yourself on WP policy using the links above. -999

3 revert warning

One more revert and you may be blocked for violating WP:3RR. Please collaborate with other editors. Thanks. -999 00:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You, User 999 are in violation of the policies decided by Wikipedia moderator T. Morton in discussion of the article Golden Dawn Tradition. The decision was reached that each group would develop its own description. You are in violation of this decision and I have reported you to Wikipedia administration. You should be blocked.

I think not. Please point to this decision: there was no such decision, it is against WP policy. If there was such a statement, please provide a link to it. I see you've asked T. Morton. I'm sure he'll straighten you out about this. -999 01:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"This page is edited and maintained by moderator agreement by the A+O. User 999 keep your hands off, please" [1]. Tell me more of this "moderator agreement." Tom Harrison ^Talk 03:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, I've temporarily blocked you for disruptive edit warring. When your block is up, please use the talk page and work toward consensus with the other editors. Tom Harrison ^Talk 03:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

In response to your comment on Tom Harrison's page, the other editor's and I are doing nothing wrong. The consensus is against you. When that happens, you simply can't succeed in a revert war, you have to discuss and compromise. It's how WP works. Try it, maybe you'll like it. See WP:CON for details. -999 (Talk) 18:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you ever reply to other editors? -999 (Talk) 20:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you haven't responded to the detailed discussion and survey about your attempted additions to The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. - this sort of discussion is how editors come to consensus. You are interested in consensus, aren't you? -999 (Talk) 00:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A consencsu among the HOGD, Inc. block. Bull. Let us seek mediation or delete all HOGD related pages forever as JMax555 has suggested to end the bickering. Quit posturing. --Zanoni666 04:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too weak to accomplish anything honestly, eh? -999 (Talk) 04:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article are not likely to be deleted. JMax was quoting an admin's comment, and the articles are not likely to be deleted seeing as how they have at least some sources. Zos 16:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to request Mediation

I noticed that you've asked about how to request mediation. First thing you should do is carefully read through this page here. It should give you a firm grasp of how the process works, and at the lower part of the page there's a section you can fill in where you can request mediation on an article. It's a core part of the dispute resolution process here on Wikipedia, and something that everyone should familiarize themselves with. Hope it helps. -- Daniel Davis 05:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.

The consensus is 3 to 1 against making the changes you keep applying. Please STOP and join the discussion and survey, if you are indeed editing in good faith. -999 (Talk) 15:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Surveys

Discounting new users who've never edited is standard procedure in surveys. If you don't believe me, go ahead and list the article on WP:AfD, which is the only formal deletion process. -999 (Talk) 17:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, but you can't, since it requires putting a tag on the page, and being a sock, you are unable to do so... -999 (Talk) 17:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: No personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. I refer to this diff. -999 (Talk) 17:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

Please stop forcing material into articles without achieving consensus with the other editors first. There has been talk about opening a user conduct RfC about your behavior. You most likely don't want the attention that that would bring, considering your low actions of attempting to introduce potential slander about a living person into The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. -999 (Talk) 17:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't stop reverting The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc., I'll be signing onto that Request for Comment. There is nothing wrong with the existing article - everything is properly cited and I, as an outsider, can detect no bias. You version is full of biased statements, though. -Baba Louis 17:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sock

This and subsequent diffs tell me you and HermeticScholar are not acting independently. Tom Harrison ^Talk 01:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked that one as a sockpuppet based on the evidence above. Furthermore, it was created during the 3RR block of this user. If that is wrong, let both send me an e-mail with indentifying information, and if that is convincing, I will unblock. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 02:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No sockpuppet

Uou are not blocked for sockpupptry, you only have been blocked in the past for 24 hours for 3RR. [2]. The person who added the tag to your page will get a warning from me, he is well-known for you as you clash often with him, but if you were a sockpuppet, you only could edit this page and nothing else. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 01:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can see who blocked you by going to Special:Contributions in your case Special:Contributions/Zanoni666 (link is found at the left og the page, under the search box). At the top, you have a block log link, and there you can see who did that. If the people are blocked wrong, they can send independently the blocking admin an e-mail with identifying information so that it can be sorted out. If they want, they can send it also to me. In that case, I suggest you do that as well, to eliminate all the confusion. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 02:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the simple IP check is not that simple and requires a special request and investigation by a admin with checkuser capabilities, which I do not have. The fastest way is to send me an e-mail, and let them send me an e-mail too, with relevant information.-- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 02:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HOGD Mediation

I have to post this tag to all users involved in the disputation before I can submit the final mediation case. And it is a complete pain in the ass :>)

HOGD Mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, HOGD/A+O, HOGD Inc, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible..

Vandalism to the OSOGD article

Please refrain from your vandalism of the article, specifically, adding the inflamatory phrase "a group of Satanists" to the introduction paragraph. The article references the OSOGD website, and there is no such claim made there.

This incident will be reported to admin. - JMax555 19:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Due to your past behaviour, I am preparing to file a user conduct RfC unless you begin to follow WP:V and WP:RS. You've been informed about the requirement for reliable sources before, and you are well aware that internet fora and other self-published web sites cannot be used. -999 (Talk) 19:46, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]