| Revision as of 20:58, 10 June 2008 editDomer48 (talk | contribs)16,098 edits Rv nonsence← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:25, 11 June 2008 edit undoCrieff405 (talk | contribs)381 edits Please read this revision before this bigot removes it.Next edit → | ||
| Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
| Domer48, I need to apologise to you for deleting your recent comments from my talk page. I was doing two or three things at once and also was carrying on two other WP conversations at the same time, and for some reason I thought your comments there were made by ], who I was talking with on a different page. (Must be the capital "D" in the name or something...) Your comment there was almost identical to one the other user had just made to me seconds before elsewhere, and I thought he was just copying his message onto my talk page so I knew about it, so I deleted it b/c I was fine to have the conversation where it was ongoing elsewhere. (If that makes sense ... — if not, just please accept my apology for deleting your comment; it wasn't intended to be a rejection of you or your comments, which I can understand it may have appeared to be. ] <sup>]</sup> 09:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | Domer48, I need to apologise to you for deleting your recent comments from my talk page. I was doing two or three things at once and also was carrying on two other WP conversations at the same time, and for some reason I thought your comments there were made by ], who I was talking with on a different page. (Must be the capital "D" in the name or something...) Your comment there was almost identical to one the other user had just made to me seconds before elsewhere, and I thought he was just copying his message onto my talk page so I knew about it, so I deleted it b/c I was fine to have the conversation where it was ongoing elsewhere. (If that makes sense ... — if not, just please accept my apology for deleting your comment; it wasn't intended to be a rejection of you or your comments, which I can understand it may have appeared to be. ] <sup>]</sup> 09:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :Then again, now that I review it, it ''was'' you that made the comment, but it was just on ]'s talk page, and I didn't realise it was ''you'' and not ''BigDunc'' responding. Hence my confusion. Anyway, see above for the apology. ] <sup>]</sup> 09:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | :Then again, now that I review it, it ''was'' you that made the comment, but it was just on ]'s talk page, and I didn't realise it was ''you'' and not ''BigDunc'' responding. Hence my confusion. Anyway, see above for the apology. ] <sup>]</sup> 09:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ==IRA== | |||
| Neutrality ? You think referring to the IRA as a "Militarist" organisation is neutral? It was not officially sanctioned by ANY nation, therefore if ANYTHING it is a "paramilitary" organisation? And as long as we talk about "Neutrality" how about NOT having someone attached to an "irish repulicanism" project moderating the IRA pages??? | |||
| How is it any less biased than my referring to it as a Terrorist organisation IN addition to the other definition? If anything it would be a PARAMILITARY organisation. But then, I can see from your page that neutrality is not something you're familiar with. You apparently only became a moderator in order to promote IRA propaganda. Thanks. But go ahead, remove it because it's "noncense" (sic). It's spelled "nonsense". | |||
Revision as of 18:25, 11 June 2008
- Pádraig, Rest In Peace a chara - sorely missed - not to be forgotten.
Not in the mood today, due to the obvious reason outlined above.--Domer48 (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
|
 Archives |
|---|
Useful links
3RR Irish Manual of Style MOS & Policy : 3RR ~ AGF ~ CITE ~ Warning templates ~ CIV ~ CON ~ DP ~ DR ~ EQ ~ Fallacies ~ NOR ~ NOT ~ NPA ~ NPOV ~ POINT ~ RS ~ TOPIC ~ V ~ WP:ATT ~ WP:SYN ~ Deletion Policies ~ WP:HOWTO ~ WEASEL
Regimental History
I have those pages scanned and ready to go. I need an e-mail address though. Could you reply to my internal e-mail to you please?GDD1000 (talk) 15:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Great Irish Famine
Domer, I'm sorry, but I've got to tell you that you're fairly close to a page ban on Great Irish Famine. All you've been doing is revert, revert, revert. Please refrain from making reverts to the article for the time being. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice Ryan, but it is obvious to anyone who cares to read the discussion that I discussed, reverted, discussed reverted, discussed, discussed, discussed, and reverted. Now has my conduct been disruptive? I don't think it has, but I welcome any advice on how to move forward. Thanks for the advice though, is very welcome, --Domer48 (talk) 11:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- One more revert, or anything resembling a revert, and you will be page banned. Ways to move forward? Mediation, request for comments, third opinion, build a new lead from scratch ... but definitely no more reverts please. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Angusmclellan you will of course show good cause, and it would be helpful to indicate what I'm actually doing wrong? Have I breached any of our policies or guidlines? Have I not discussed all the changes? --Domer48 (talk) 07:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Reverting is covered by Misplaced Pages:Edit war. As for Asmaybe (talk · contribs), we'll see. Thank you for the documentation. However, it is not up to me or Daniel or Ryan to decide on content. If you feel that people are straying away from what the sources actually said, as well as the talk page there is mediation, a request for comments, a third opinion, and all the various noticeboards. There's even one on "original research" these days. There is no need to get bogged down in argument. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Arbitration has little or nothing to do with content, which would include discussions of page naming, except where there are policy issues involved. No original research has quite a narrow meaning. It does not include "I don't think that the source says what you think it does" disputes. You should be able to work those out on your own. As for the name, the likelihood of the current name being kept seems close to zero. I suggest you look for a second-best choice. As for the rest, try dispute resolution. Edit warring will get you (and anyone else who does it) banned from the page. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Domer48, I need to apologise to you for deleting your recent comments from my talk page. I was doing two or three things at once and also was carrying on two other WP conversations at the same time, and for some reason I thought your comments there were made by User:BigDunc, who I was talking with on a different page. (Must be the capital "D" in the name or something...) Your comment there was almost identical to one the other user had just made to me seconds before elsewhere, and I thought he was just copying his message onto my talk page so I knew about it, so I deleted it b/c I was fine to have the conversation where it was ongoing elsewhere. (If that makes sense ... — if not, just please accept my apology for deleting your comment; it wasn't intended to be a rejection of you or your comments, which I can understand it may have appeared to be. Good Ol’factory 09:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Then again, now that I review it, it was you that made the comment, but it was just on User:BigDunc's talk page, and I didn't realise it was you and not BigDunc responding. Hence my confusion. Anyway, see above for the apology. Good Ol’factory 09:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
IRA
Neutrality ? You think referring to the IRA as a "Militarist" organisation is neutral? It was not officially sanctioned by ANY nation, therefore if ANYTHING it is a "paramilitary" organisation? And as long as we talk about "Neutrality" how about NOT having someone attached to an "irish repulicanism" project moderating the IRA pages??? How is it any less biased than my referring to it as a Terrorist organisation IN addition to the other definition? If anything it would be a PARAMILITARY organisation. But then, I can see from your page that neutrality is not something you're familiar with. You apparently only became a moderator in order to promote IRA propaganda. Thanks. But go ahead, remove it because it's "noncense" (sic). It's spelled "nonsense".