Revision as of 09:03, 28 June 2009 editWildhartlivie (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers55,910 edits →Neutrality Discussion on Jonestown← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:27, 29 June 2009 edit undoHodja Nasreddin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers31,217 edits ANI comment - My personal advice is to stop editing "Human right in the US". Most articles are owned, did you notice this only now?Next edit → | ||
Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
==Done== | ==Done== | ||
I'm done with discussing this issue. I keep wondering why an administrator hasn't intervened with what is being said and the attacks upon me and the two of you. There is no doubt in mind that this is simply following an agenda that extends way beyond "fact checking". It's giving me a monstrous headache. ] (]) 09:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC) | I'm done with discussing this issue. I keep wondering why an administrator hasn't intervened with what is being said and the attacks upon me and the two of you. There is no doubt in mind that this is simply following an agenda that extends way beyond "fact checking". It's giving me a monstrous headache. ] (]) 09:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
==Comment== | |||
I saw your comment at ANI. The suggestion to file an RfC about another user's conduct is reasonable. This way you will see if his behavior was problematic, and if the problems persist, you might wish to go with arbitration. My personal advice however is to stop editing "Human right in the US" and do something else. In fact, most of WP articles on controversial subjects are ] by individual users or groups. If someone struggle with them, he ends up as a "problematic user", gets editing restrictions, and so on.] (]) 03:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:27, 29 June 2009
Welcome
|
Eastern bloc map
Hello, Mosedschurte. You have new messages at Goldsztajn's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
3RR
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.
FYI
Just thought you should know:
]
The never ending edit war continues unabated.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 18:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- I mean, wow, just wow. Yachtsman1 (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Check the attempted edits at Jonestown now re the Jonestown Conspiracy theory.Mosedschurte (talk) 20:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Removal of NPOV tag from Jonestown
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Misplaced Pages. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 00:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Happy News
] Viriditas has proposed adding new materials to the Jonestown article on the Jonestown conspiracy theory. It can be found under NPOV. But this editor appears shy, and wishes to "discuss" her porposed contributions with you. I told her to add away, improve that article, make those changes. But she won't do so without your input, she wishes to "discuss" this matter with you beforehand because it might be "controversial". I just thought I would let you know.Yachtsman1 (talk) 09:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Second warning: Removal of NPOV tag from Jonestown
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Misplaced Pages without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 12:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- This is getting absurd.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 22:28, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Neutrality Discussion on Jonestown
FYI: ]. Just thought I would let you know.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 23:01, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Done
I'm done with discussing this issue. I keep wondering why an administrator hasn't intervened with what is being said and the attacks upon me and the two of you. There is no doubt in mind that this is simply following an agenda that extends way beyond "fact checking". It's giving me a monstrous headache. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Comment
I saw your comment at ANI. The suggestion to file an RfC about another user's conduct is reasonable. This way you will see if his behavior was problematic, and if the problems persist, you might wish to go with arbitration. My personal advice however is to stop editing "Human right in the US" and do something else. In fact, most of WP articles on controversial subjects are owned by individual users or groups. If someone struggle with them, he ends up as a "problematic user", gets editing restrictions, and so on.Biophys (talk) 03:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)