User talk:Weezer/ban

See also: User talk:Michael/ban

See also: Jimbo Wales on Michael hard ban (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003890)

---

Weezer is suspiciously Micheal like in behaviour, continues the unfounded obsession that Crass formed in 1976 and that Talk pages are there for blanking and vandalising. His syntax (see talk his talk page) is also suspiciously Micheal like. I think a careful eye needs to be kept on this one. quercus robur 09:04 Mar 31, 2003 (UTC)

I consider what he is doing to be outright vandalism, not just "annoying". Michael/Weezer is refusing to go by any of the guidelines we have asked him to. Almost every single edit he makes has to be fixed or reverted by someone, and he has a habit of making many edits when he's on a roll, so to speak. His information is usually incorrect, badly stated, or completely linguistically incomprehensible. It is a really irritating habit he has been abusive about, regarding our attempts to assist him. -- goatasaur

---

Michael, your so-called "contributions" will be rolled back no matter what name you use. -- Zoe

I ain't Michael. Sorry, you send this message to the wrong user. - Weezer

---

Good one. Weezer does NOT consider themselves emo, though, because they AREN'T. Your broken English gives you away, and you are becoming a troll. -- goatasaur

Really, I ain't michael. - Weezer

"We currently consists of the following four members:"

Please. -- goatasaur

---

You are either Micheal or you are another troll. Can't you find some newsgroup to troll on instead of here? quercus robur

STOP IT!, I'm not Michael! stop calling me that. -- Weezer

---

I believe you have been told this before, but I will do it again. When a band has a self-titled album, the title is not Self-Titled, the title is the TITLE OF THE ALBUM, which is the NAME OF THE BAND. I.E.: "Audioslave's first album, Audioslave" instead of "Audioslave's first album, Self-Titled". Your insistence on using incorrect terminology is getting very irritating. -- goatasaur

it is also a typical Micheal 'prank'. You are fooling nobody. quercus robur

---

Michael, there is absolutely no definition of alternative rock that would include Weezer. I can kinda see emo, but even that is a stretch. This is absurd. I'm going to ask you a point-blank question:

Do you want to work on building an open source encyclopedia that is written from a NPOV and contains large amounts of verifiable facts about subjects with real world correlations?

I realize that, if English is not your first language, as I believe to be true in spite of a lack of confirmation from you, the question may not be understandable. Feel free to ask for clarification before answering.

If the answer is no, you are not welcome here. Please go elsewhere to spread your disinformation. If the answer is yes, I thank you for listening to suggestions from myself, Zoe, Salsa Shark, Quercus Robur, Camembert, Ortolan88 and others.

In addition, I recommend you not edit under the name Weezer. IIRC, you are Canadian and I don't know what Canadian laws apply here, but Rivers Cuomo and others (such as the lawyer-rich record label, whichever it is) might not take kindly to you representing yourself as the band Weezer. If I am wrong, and this really is Cuomo or some other valid represantive of the band, who happens to have multiple linguistic similarities to Michael, then I regret this comment and feel free to represent yourself however you want, though even you are not an absolute authority on your band's generic classification. If this is Michael, then you are willfully misrepresenting yourself as a spokesman or member of the band; this is untrue, dishonest and accomplishes nothing but making more highly-valued members of the Wikipedia community support automatic reversion or outright banning. If you wish to be a valued member of the Wikipedia community, I recommend you defend yourself on the mailing list -- if there is a language barrier, please tell us what language is fluent for you, and I will try to find some way to communicate with you meaningfully. Just so you know, mav has suggested banning you on the mailing list. I agree with him, and I don't hesitate to predict that there will be little opposition to his proposal. If you continue to edit under other names and/or anonymously, there are ways of finding out your identity from your ISP and pressing charges; if the owner of the Wikipedia, Jimbo Wales requests that you refrain from editing the site, my understanding is that you are then prosecutable. (i.e. continuing to edit after being banned may put you in legal trouble)Tuf-Kat

You gotta hand it to Weezer/son of Michael, he is persistent. But then so are lawyers. Could he be the first wikipedia court case? The court case when this person is presecuted should be fun. Though I hope he doesn't have access to computers in prison. In any case, congrats to everyone to is so incredibly quick at reverting his rubbish. How long will it take for him to realise that not one word of anything he ever writes will be allowed to stay more than five minutes on wikipedia, even before the prosecution. STÓD/ÉÍRE 02:01 Apr 3, 2003 (UTC)

---

By the way, Weezer, the owner of this website has banned you. You might want to take a look at the mailing list archives, if you want to know why he did that. Here's a link to the April archives (/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-April/date).

And in my capacity as a Wikipedia Developer, it probably falls on me to enforce the ban. So I'm going to have to "lock" your user accounts tonight: both Michael and Weezer.

Don't! - Michael and Weezer