Duhon~enwiki

It was surprising that Steve Nash won by so much bias boy.Insert non-formatted text hereNo you don't get it in your head bias boy. NOTICE THE WORDING. I wrote that his supporters claim that!! don't delete that sentence, add one if you'd like. 5 Games big deal you are insane if you think LeBron shouldn't have gotten more votes anyways. The fact that NASH won in a landslide is freaking surprising. This is supposed to be a neutral site, don't mess things up.

There are a whole bunch of potential copytright violations on the kobe bryant page--Duhon (UTC) April 30th

Just make sure, you're talking only about the images, which are quite bad, and not the article's text, right? Thanks. ×Meegs 06:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I know, this is a major problem. User:Simishag is in the process of cleaning up the Kobe Bryant article and if Hganesan reverts it to contain his POV and cruft, then maybe it is time to file a WP:RFC or possibly ask for mediation. There seems to be a pretty clear consensus between the editors of these pages that a number of Hganesan's edits aren't appropriate. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 02:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've already made a request on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. I don't feel comfortable with blocking him myself as I feel that I am too involved and I'd prefer to leave it up to another admin. But thanks for bringing it to my attention. If no action is taken in the next few hours, you might want to drop a message under his subsection on the 3RR page to give it more attention. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 21:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah it's getting a little crazy. I've posted to the admin's noticeboard [1] and a couple of other places, and I've also posted followups to the talk pages of the admins who did the blocks just so they're aware of the situation. If you feel up to it, check out User_talk:Hganesan. The guy seems to have a lot of time on his hands and is completely unwilling to engage in discussions or compromises: it's his work or nothing. Any attempt to explain why his edits are unacceptable is met with long rants and edit comments like "I know more about basketball than anyone here." Fortunately he seems to have attracted a lot of admin attention. I'm not sure what the next step is here but I agree, at this point he's just attempting to cause as much disruption as possible. Simishag 20:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

That's pretty funny, notice many of hganesan's posts and arguments have been accepted onto the steve nash and kobe bryant pages and he has contributed to other pages as well.

Duhon all that hganesan and I are doing are posting articles and putting on relevant facts that you are deleting, and you are loving steve nash like no other. Something should be done to you.

After a succession of blocks by numerous admins over the last month, User:Hganesan has returned yet again to Steve Nash and Kobe Bryant. I don't want to waste a bunch of time edit warring with him again, so I'm instead going to try a new tactic. I'd like to get as many NBA editors as possible together on this, so that we can make a single unified push to the appropriate admins. I am at a loss for other tactics we can use to avoid his continued attempts to push his agenda and his unwillingness to compromise. Please contact me at User talk:Simishag if you're interested in helping out. Thanks. Simishag 23:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, how is LeBron ineligeble to compete in the Slam Dunk contest? Where is your source for this information?Thanks for the time,

--MorrisS 03:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with that, there shouldn't be a whole section on it. Good editing, cheerio

--MorrisS 05:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I left my reverse findings on Talk:Hollywood North. Also, I really like that quote on your userpage. I recognized it immediately as an adaptation from "This is my gun, there are many like it, but this one is mine". Mkdw^talk 06:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Langara College 00:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That is a standard {{test3} template warning. Some details would be including irrelevent information to articles, reverting to previous versions destroying information, wiping sections, falsely adding templates to articles, etc. etc. If you wish to dispute this claim, I will participate in a formal user review of your contributions to Wikipedia. Langara College 01:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

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/Hollywood North, 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. Langara College 01:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

See my reply to your allegation on mytalkpage. I have a recipe for crow pie here somewhere....Skookum1 05:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:Lebron23.jpg, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://flickr.com/photos/matthewkrautheim/125813855/. As a copyright violation, Image:Lebron23.jpg appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:Lebron23.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on [[Talk::Image:Lebron23.jpg]]. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Image:Lebron23.jpg, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. MECU≈talk 03:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I've already notified an admin to keep an eye on him let's see what happens. Just try to keep cool. Quadzilla99 17:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

You can always notify admins or go to WP:ANI. I really wouldn't be of much help. Quadzilla99 02:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

An RfC was recently started on the user for his personal attacks and continued reverts. If you wish to comment, here's the page: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/TyrusThomas4lyf. Zodiiak 22:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello i found an interview akon did with an israeli magazine where he says he is 25-26. I dont care which source you find. It is stil not as good as the man's himself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaTNRjtR6q8. I please ask you not to revert-R-HIT

LeBron James has received some heavy editing recently. Would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Who says Wikipedia has to go by the NBA.com weight and height information? Or should I ask: What makes you believe that the NBA.com information is more accurate than the respective players own words? Because the last time the NBA weighed and measured LeBron James was in 2003, at the predraft camp. --Bender235 (talk) 16:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Paul Sturgess is clearly listed on his page as being measured by Guinness with no citations. The first citation has him as 7'8. Without a citation his height then is 7'8. If you have one for Guinness that's great, if not then we shall have to go of the NBA listing.Halbared (talk) 17:50, 19 March 2012 (UTC)Amendment. I see you have updated the main list page with the links that are not on his main page, great. Good work.Halbared (talk) 17:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Can you show me where the source says the survey "was mostly used to ascertain the number of african-americans who practiced mainstream judaism"? As I wrote, without a source, we have to take your word for it. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Here look at this:

When the forum participants exchanged their population estimates, they concluded that there are close to 200,000 black Jews.

Washington says the 200,000 estimate is based on a 1990 Council of Jewish Federations survey that used both the narrow and broad definitions of "Who is a Jew?"

Based on the strict halachic definition -- that Jews must be the children of Jewish mothers and practice their faith, or undergo a halachically recognized conversion -- there are about 135,000 black Jews in this country.

But based on the broad definition, which says anyone who calls himself or herself a Jew is one, there are 260,000.

It is evident the purpose of the study conducted by the council of jewish federations was to determine the number of african americans who practice judaism. The Black Hebrew israelites are not considered by any mainstream organizations to be an actual branch of judaism. It is misleading to deny what the intent of the survey was. As well as the previous manner in which it did not acknowledge where that population figure came from, as it was lifted from that survey and simply referenced by the alliance of black jews who did not conduct it themselves.Duhon (talk) 04:02, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

And the figure of 200,000 cited in the article? What does it have to do with Jews who practice mainstream Judaism? In fact, it's somewhere between the number of self-identified Jews (260,000) and those who are Jewish according to halakha (135,000). So your language is not supported by the source. Do you have another source, or are you just making assumptions? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 08:32, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jonas Valančiūnas. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

23:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

12:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)