User talk:Shivlingam

|class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid #FFFFFF; background-color:#F5FFFA; vertical-align:top"|

|}

|}

Welcome on behalf on Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism. Your contributions will help Hinduism articles grow.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. {{#if:|The thread is {{{thread}}}. }}{{#if:Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Abuse_of_barnstars|The discussion is about the topic :Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Abuse_of_barnstars.}} Thank you. --NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 00:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Until you have a successful RFA or RFB, kindly do not add categories that may lead users to believe that you are an administrator or bureaucrat. Misrepresentation of this nature is disruptive. –xeno^talk 13:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:What about WP:GFDL ?--owner wikipedia (talk) 13:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

::GFDL means you can re-use text but it doesn't mean you can use that text to misrepresent your position at Wikipedia. You should change your signature as well. –xeno^talk 13:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

::I can use the text whereever I WANT besides my signature is kept because it is considered humorous.Why do you and your band of hooligans (That is the only word I could use AGF ) stalk me day and night You revert ALL my edits even if they are well referenced–ME^Talk 13:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:::If you cease making disruptive edits (including an inappropriate signature that misrepresents your position), I'm sure you'll notice you receive fewer messages from other users. –xeno^talk 13:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

::::My edits have never been disruptive .I've never (NEVER) added false info into an article. You guys hate me and never assume agf I donna who supported you in your RFA .–ME^Talk 13:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:::::I will start assuming good faith as soon as you stop misrepresenting yourself in your signature - in particular, stop signing as [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&diff=prev&oldid=316883118 "owner wikipedia"]. Please consider this a formal warning. –xeno^talk 13:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC) (Removing the false barnstars would help too, but those are less problematic)

::::::{{ec}}Gosh I think I'll wait for the final warning nah Gonna change it SEE --I do not own [[WP]] (talk) 13:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC) Happy ?.–ME^Talk 13:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:::::::Thank you for agreeing not to misrepresent yourself in your signature. –xeno^talk 13:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

::::::::

Hi.. some of what you're doing is what we call "ruleslawyering" - see WP:LAWYER. It's not a very helpful way to behave. It would be best if you just stayed away from the administrator's noticeboard, until you're more familiar with how Wikipedia works. Friday (talk) 14:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:Hi ME^Talk 13:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

If you bought a "Congressional Medal of Honor" from eBay, would you be entitled to actually wear it? Barnstars are earned, not taken. Same thing with adminship and ownership of Wikipedia. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

{{unblock reviewed|What's the reason behind this ban I (Allegedly } disruptively edited my talk page COME on it's my page which I can edit ,Apparent sp? --I do not own [[WP]] (talk) 15:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)|decline=Your signature implies you're here to make a WP:POINT, your edits imply you're unusually familiar with Wikipedia for a new user, and your edits are similar to those of a banned user. I'm going to take a look now to see what other accounts I can find. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)}}

{{unblock reviewed|1=:I changed my sig according to a discussion above --I do not own [[WP ]] (talk) 15:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC) Xeno approved my new signature *1 You do not have evidence of me being a SP *2 You do not have evidence of my disruptive editing on articles This is what I get for being friendly I tried helping users on the help page they reverted my edits I tried to ask people for verifiable references on lingam they reverted it.I added information (reliable and referenced ) on Saffron Terror they removed it can you explain those reverts on saffron terror .Leave that aside They called me on ANI I saw an IP being blocked even though it did not edit after level a level 4 warning ,That was the last straw Questioning a sys ops action is on wp is considered as a bannable offense and they banned me for that Note my banning was mentioned on the discussion about that IP instead of the discussion going on about my own user space |decline=No valid unblock reason given; no evidence that you have disavowed your disruptive behavior. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)}}

{{unblock reviewed|1=As per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ani#58.174.227.190 BAN my SOCKMASTER I do not own [[WP ]] (talk) 18:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)|decline=No unblock request made. –xeno^talk 18:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)}}

:There's an uncomfortable amount of Myspacing going on between this account, {{user|Notedgrant}}, {{user|Coldplay Expert}}, and {{user|Guitarherochristopher}}. If I had to guess, the lot of you might know each other, offline. It's all well and great to be friends, I welcome and encourage it, but please be sure that you're all mostly here to work on an encyclopedia, not a social call. There are plenty of places you can hang out for fun on the web, if that's all you're after. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Check out the timings of this users edits I think banning him was uncalled for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#58.174.227.190 --I do not own [[WP]] (talk) 15:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:CAN you PLEASE review the illegitimate banning of the ip address above --I do not own [[WP]] (talk) 15:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:: Looks clear cut. Nobody actually has to be warned before being blocked, depending on the level of disruption. That IP was actually warned. Should have been blocked long ago. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

:::Oh that's new I think I gotta get my pills out before I lose IT HECK --I do not own [[WP]] (talk) 15:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Do I know you?--NotedGrant Talk 19:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)