| Revision as of 18:14, 12 February 2015 editYMB29 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,352 edits →Your edit warring: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:16, 12 February 2015 edit undoVolunteer Marek (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers94,133 edits →Your edit warringNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| This is the last warning. Don't edit war to remove text for dubious reasons, especially in articles you never edited before. | This is the last warning. Don't edit war to remove text for dubious reasons, especially in articles you never edited before. | ||
| Again, there is enough evidence of your personal attacks and wiki stalking of me. -] (]) 18:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | Again, there is enough evidence of your personal attacks and wiki stalking of me. -] (]) 18:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :Go away. I told you're not welcome here. You are edit warring against multiple users and reinserting text which misrepresents sources. That's all I'm going to say to you here. Don't post on my talk page again.] (]) 18:16, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:16, 12 February 2015
Your big red button
Your script for finding unsourced BLPs is a great idea but over half of the ones it kicks out are not eligible for BLPPROD because of their creation date. I had to start using Twinkle to automate the check. You might want to edit the script to check creation date. Otherwise... I love it! JBH (talk) 21:00, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- It's not my script, I lifted it off another user's page, but I agree it's great. I'll see if I can find out who first made it and let them know about checking the creation date.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:04, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, I looked into the templates used and I might be wrong. I think PROD reason-Unsourced BLP and a BLPPROD are two different things so maybe it is a non-issue. JBH (talk) 21:28, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I think it sends the worst possible message to people. A link to WP:BEFORE would be better. Or to the Cleanup Listings. Encourage new editors to delete stuff isn't ever going to end well. The-Pope (talk) 15:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, I looked into the templates used and I might be wrong. I think PROD reason-Unsourced BLP and a BLPPROD are two different things so maybe it is a non-issue. JBH (talk) 21:28, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
SWH
Hey, all citations are given to extremely reliable sources. Please give your reasons on talk rather than removing because "you don't feel like it". SWH 03:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Nope, a lot of that was unsourced and you sneaked in some stuff, as well as removed other sourced material. And I did start a discussion on talk.Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:30, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- You should realize that lead section should summarize the article's content. And I didn't sneaked in some stuff. Your accusations are groundless and assumed bad faiths. "Other sourced materials" were added by myself when the international studies were absent. SWH 05:44, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ok. Just leave it. Now I added sources in the lead. SWH 06:23, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Your edit warring
This is the last warning. Don't edit war to remove text for dubious reasons, especially in articles you never edited before. Again, there is enough evidence of your personal attacks and wiki stalking of me. -YMB29 (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Go away. I told you're not welcome here. You are edit warring against multiple users and reinserting text which misrepresents sources. That's all I'm going to say to you here. Don't post on my talk page again.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:16, 12 February 2015 (UTC)