Misplaced Pages

User talk:84.13.166.40: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:22, 14 June 2008 editGoodDay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers493,801 edits Reverts: responding← Previous edit Revision as of 18:36, 14 June 2008 edit undoGoodDay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers493,801 editsm Reverts: Forgot to signNext edit →
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:


::I'd rather keep away. I'm not entirely welcomed at ]; my consistancy ideas (which Snowden has re-introduced) tends to cause ''friction''. Besides, my return may get me ''blocked'' under charges of ''trolling''. ] (]) 18:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC) ::I'd rather keep away. I'm not entirely welcomed at ]; my consistancy ideas (which Snowden has re-introduced) tends to cause ''friction''. Besides, my return may get me ''blocked'' under charges of ''trolling''. ] (]) 18:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

::I don't consider Jack a ''troll'' (he's my buddy). PS- If you want? you may add my support for ''constituent country'' at the discussion & let the others know I've given you permission to do so. ] (]) 18:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:36, 14 June 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

Reverts

Try reading the discussion on the Scotland talk page which went on for some time and came to a consensus! Please revert back. Jack forbes (talk) 12:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

If you absolutely insist on bringing this discussion back up, please read the discussion on the talk page, and if you still want to talk about it bring it up on the talk page. The right thing to do is revert it back to the way it was, discuss it, and if you get a consensus on your view, then you can change it. Thanks! Jack forbes (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
As a fellow who used to argue for constitutent country? I admire your efforts at Talk: Scotland. PS- Good luck, you (and your supporters) will need it. GoodDay (talk) 15:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd rather keep away. I'm not entirely welcomed at Scotland; my consistancy ideas (which Snowden has re-introduced) tends to cause friction. Besides, my return may get me blocked under charges of trolling. GoodDay (talk) 18:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't consider Jack a troll (he's my buddy). PS- If you want? you may add my support for constituent country at the discussion & let the others know I've given you permission to do so. GoodDay (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)