| Revision as of 15:05, 12 June 2007 editH (talk | contribs)23,582 edits →Please stop policing me← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:23, 12 June 2007 edit undoProabivouac (talk | contribs)10,467 edits →Please stop policing meNext edit → | ||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
| :I am not telling you what opinion to hold, and I certainly don't think you are stupid. If anything you are stubborn, which is fine by me. All I did was give you a note I would give anyone else, I did not even criticize the stance you took. I am not your enemy. ]<!-- Was HighInBC --> 15:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC) | :I am not telling you what opinion to hold, and I certainly don't think you are stupid. If anything you are stubborn, which is fine by me. All I did was give you a note I would give anyone else, I did not even criticize the stance you took. I am not your enemy. ]<!-- Was HighInBC --> 15:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Not that this is any kind of active dispute, but since you'd asked to which comment re Naik/Bin Laden I'd referred, it was this:"] if he like bin laden then what is wrong with that?"] 20:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:23, 12 June 2007
User talk:HighInBC
Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
|
irc password posted on your userpage
hey man, you've got your irc password posted on your userpage (/msg nickserv identify overlord). not quite the wisest thing to be publicizing, especially if you have aops in certain channels!Vonkwink 07:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- "overlord" is not my real password for anything, it is more of a placeholder for my password. 13:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Derek Jacobi
Wouldn't removal of the image now constitute as vandalism, as the image is perefectly fine there? Will 16:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- No, see WP:VANDAL#What_vandalism_is_not, disputes over interpretation of policy are not vandalism. 16:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's not a dispute of an interpretation of policy now, as it unequivocally follows the policy. Besides, the second removal wasn't due to policy interpretation, it was spillover from the Utopia image war. Will 17:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- It does not unequivocally follow policy, there is a very legitimate concern over the rational used on the talk page of that article, it is awaiting your response. Reasonable people can disagree on such matters, that does not mean it is vandalism. You need to go to the talk page an gain consensus instead of reverting. 17:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- An IP with a vendetta against the image =/= legitimate concern. Will 17:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- The fact that the person is an IP makes no difference. The talk page does contain legitimate concerns, that you have not even responded to. "IP with a vendetta against the image" is not listed as an exemption from 3RR. I am not saying you are wrong or right, I don't know, I am saying that you need to discuss this matter instead of just reverting. 17:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Elvis nae'blis impersonator
*poke* *grin* -- nae'blis 04:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. I checked the IPs userpage for a note from you, I see it is there now. Sorry about the inconvenience. I use User:HighOnTheRoad, which I have marked. 04:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm not going to bother tagging the IP pages, since they may shift out from under me at some point, but I've now gotten a notice up on my own userpage about the matter. -- nae'blis 04:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop policing me
I kindly request you . Do you think it was necessary to leave such a messages. I forget to write edit summary but why you assume that I do not know. Is that my first day in wikipedia. Please stop giving me mental stress. Please I beg you to leave me alone. --- A. L. M. 14:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Why is it that when I defend you, you welcome my comment, but when I make simple requests you consider it hostile? I really just wanted you to understand that you will likely be reverted if you do not use an edit summary. I am not harassing you, but making the same requests I would make of any Wikipedian. 14:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please go and post same request on User:Briangotts for this. I know you will not because it will look stupid to do so. Is not it? I will prefer to leave me alone for few months. I will be much more thankful with it. -:) --- A. L. M. 14:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- You need to understand that this is a collaborative editing environment, and you asking me not to contact you regarding your editorial practices is not a reasonable request. If you don't want other people commenting on your edits then Google "Free wiki" and you can have a wiki you are in charge of. I am not picking on you. If you have a problem with Briangotts, you are welcome to leave him a message. 14:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- -:(. I can only beg which I already did. I though you will be kind enough to consider it but .... Thank you for showing me other alternatives as usuall. It feel like you just keep pushing me to leave by giving me other option. Or you feel that I am stupid that I do not know what you keep telling me. bye (end of discussion from my side) --- A. L. M. 15:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- I am not telling you what opinion to hold, and I certainly don't think you are stupid. If anything you are stubborn, which is fine by me. All I did was give you a note I would give anyone else, I did not even criticize the stance you took. I am not your enemy. 15:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Not that this is any kind of active dispute, but since you'd asked to which comment re Naik/Bin Laden I'd referred, it was this:"Proabivouac if he like bin laden then what is wrong with that?"Proabivouac 20:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)