User talk:Madjabuds

August 2007

Your recent edits to Sasha Grey could give editors of Wikipedia the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that this is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a genuine dispute with the Community or its members, please use dispute resolution. HalfShadow 03:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Madjabubs, I know you feel threatened by having a name end up appearing on Wikipedia... but threatening legal action is not the way to go about removing it. As HalfShadow points out, Wikipedia has a clear policy regarding legal threats which in part states: "Users who make legal threats will typically be blocked from editing indefinitely, while legal threats are outstanding." Tabercil 05:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That said, you are right about the license. We'll ask to have that edit removed from the article history. If you have further problems, please contact Tabercil or myself (or any Wikipedia:Administrator) and we'll try to help. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 12:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed on the history section of this discussion page, your real (?) name appears. I googled it and it came up on Italian, French, Swedish, and Portuguese Wikipedia (I guess its Swedish and Portuguese: sv.wikipedia.org / pt.wikipedia.org) and also at wikipedia.edu.pl/en/wiki/List_of_female_porn_stars_by_decade.html. You may want to ask the admins to remove the name from the revision history of this discussion page and those European Wikis. Btw, thank you for sharing your beauty with the world. Naerhu 08:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't become brave with me beautiful young lady

Sorry.I am not an user but,I have a very small question. Please don't become brave with me beautiful young lady. Is it possible to be a catholic person and porn star at the same time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.0.24.58 (talk) 03:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Unsigned", can one be more catholic than the Pope? Can a drunkard be a catholic? Can a scientist? Well, I think anyone can be a catholic if he/her wants to be one or is raised in a catholic family.

Sasha, I haven't seen any movie of yours, but I'd like to take a written interview to you about your life and career. Please give me a sign on my discussion page if you agree. If not, it's ok. Calusarul (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the fotos

I can see the problem with your photos.The problem maybe have solution or maybe can do more easy to resolv when you find other photos that you cosidered are really good.So if you are christian I tell you one thing that sure you have to now.For Christ those problems are absolutely insignficant,but the problem with your "real conviccion" is desicive. Please !don't loose your time with stupid things like that!.In my particular opinion you like more natural in the other fotos that you hate,because you dont't have so much make-up as in the other one. I am also Christian so I will try to help you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.0.24.58 (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those comments were done by an Anonymous user that today is the user Vicond

Vicond 15:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC) (talk)[reply]

Greek?

Do you speak Greek? Reaper7 (talk) 23:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.157.224.4 (talk) 20:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legal threats

Hi Madjabuds!

I've blanked your user page because another user was concerned it read like a legal threat - which we don't allow.

If there's a specific issue you have with any Wikipedia editor, we have ways of dealing with it of which I can enlighten you upon request.

Otherwise, please remember that anything people construe as a legal threat will be removed and the editor leaving it will be blocked until the threat is withdrawn because of the chilling effect it has on free editing. Thanks! ➔ REDVEЯS would like to show you some puppies 20:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue was about something that happened in July, and seems to be settled now. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 22:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:SG01.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:SG01.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Vinh1313 (talk) 09:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vinh1313 (talk) 09:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

broken

Sasha, can you write somewhere like your blog that you chose or suggested the title of the movie so that we can properly reference it? The XBiz article that's being cited about the movie doesn't mention it. Thanks. Vinh1313 (talk) 18:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday

So I suppost today is your birthday.I had imaging that maybe you could result interesting the George Sand life. Vicond (talk) 05:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sasha Grey edits

I reverted your recent edits to the Sasha Grey article. Your edits removed all the wikilinks from within the article. Also, the last few sections of the article were copied so that there were two External links sections, as well as two References sections, etc. If you would like to add cited information back to the article, that would be fine, but please maintain the format and wikilinks. Dismas|^(talk) 08:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you think you did but this is a link to the last version of the article as you left it. You will see that there are two References sections, two External links sections, etc. There are also no wikilinks in the entirety of the Biography section. Dismas|^(talk) 09:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your editing on the Sasha Grey article. She is one of the best perfomers and a standard-bearer in the industry. --Jmundo (talk) 18:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is her. Epicgenius (talk) 01:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The unverifiable information

Dear Sasha:

There's not problem if you can corroborate your controversial information.How?Simply. Albert Einstein is the creator of the relativity theory and a lot of people know this because it has public relevance. If you has create a performance,a book,a musical composition, anything, and you know some links on the INTERNET to confirm this but not your-self commentary about it,then,you have the whole control on this situation because you are right. Now, for example I'm talking with you I have create a picture in my home,and you visit my home and see my picture.Ok,that confirm my explanation,but It don't have public relevance.In fact I like to draw very much and I have my own donations in the commons but I can say that I'm a famous painter and create my self article in Wikipedia because that is not truth. I'm not doubt that you can be a talent person but if the world don't know your work like an artist but only like a famous porn star then it certainly are not encyclopedic.Maybe you like to write and play music like a hobby....I don't know. In that case I think that is better to put it in the seccion about your personal life but not like a part of your profession.So, I espect in the future enjoy your art. Regards. Vicond (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that I like about you is that I can apreciate by yours self commentary that you are NOT a neutral person. Please don't let that this occupies a place in your life. Bye and good luck!God blesses you. Vicond (talk) 02:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wikipedian's aren't all illiterate creepy twats as you've encountered.

Besides the few people correcting your erroneous editing of your own wiki page, or telling you to curb your litigious comments, you seem to have encountered some complete twats. I just wanted to extend an apology from myself on behalf of the sane editors of Wikipedia. Clearly they are bedazzled that omg an adult entertainer uses the internet. So naturally the best way to impress her, and totally even get laid, is to start talking about god, drawings in his house (I bet he really wants you to come over and see his drawings!) and other inane drivel in really heinous ... I can't even say English, it's not English, it's noobese or something.

Regardless, I hope you edit more than just your own article, and are here for more than just PR and spin control. You may find the Wikipedia project quite engaging, it sucks you in pretty hard if you're academically focused or into learning and self improvement through education. Anyway, good luck, happy editing, and again sorry about the retards. BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 15:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ಠ_ಠ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.133.71 (talk) 03:38, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]