| Revision as of 20:43, 24 August 2010 editHodja Nasreddin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers31,217 edits →Peace offer: Rejecting what? I am not in "state of war" with you and never was. There is nothing to reject.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 23:40, 20 May 2018 edit undoTheRealWeatherMan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers728 edits Notification: listing at articles for deletion of Glutamate permease. (TW) | ||
| (487 intermediate revisions by 71 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| --- | |||
| =Disclaimer= | |||
| == ] == | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692040667 --> | |||
| == Nomination for deletion of Template:Pfam domains == | |||
| ]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 18:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | for the passion to dispute ] (]) 02:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] (]) 23:40, 20 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| I like constructive discussion but will not be involved in political and ideological struggle . | |||
| {{Long Wikibreak|]|in October}} | |||
| == Peace offer == | |||
| I have no desire to play a part in the latest round of this ridiculous battleground ( and by ]). Actually, I'd like to disengage completely, and concentrate solely on new , as I have done in the last few days after my return to editing. But it's hard to do this as long as people keep my name in their reports and presenting material against me (although I have only created new content and done nothing wrong in the last few days). So I have the following '''offering of peace''': I will not mention your name in any noticeboard discussions or present any material against you. In fact, I believe that there is currently no reason for any kind of conflict between you and me and I promise to do everything I can to prevent any kind of conflict from developing. The condition is that you stop attacking me, stop mentioning my name and remove my name from the battleground thread. I think we can both profit from making peace. Perhaps we can even collaborate on articles like ], which you recently edited, although pre-1991 history isn't really my field. I'm sure we can find something where we can collaborate on in a positive way. I'm sure that this would also be viewed favourably by the admins who, at the moment, are likely considering to indiscriminately block us all to get rid of the battleground. What do you say? ] (]) 18:09, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Well, I do not mind talking to get things straight. Then, could you please explain if you (or someone else who you know) was the person who sent emails to Petri Krohn and to Russavia ? I would like to know.] (]) 18:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Unfortunately, I don't know who is the person who has engaged in illegal email cooperation. Do you accept my offer? Btw, I have already started to ]. Looking forward to collaborating with you there if you agree. ] (]) 19:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::So, you are telling that Russavia did not tell the truth (second link). Fine, I accept it.] (]) 20:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::That's not what I'm saying. Where did you get that idea? ] (]) 20:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Captain Obvious has to point out that there is no need for any sort of formal agreement in this case. Don't do anything wrong and you won't be sanctioned, you don't need any license for this. Neither would you benefit from having one. ''Omertà'' is no good, hehe. ] (]) 19:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::And if someone did anything wrong, he will be sanctioned anyway, regardless to making separate agreements (me, Offliner or the both). Saying that, I am open to debating anything if it helps to resolve the issues.] (]) 19:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Of course the user who seriously violates the purpose of Misplaced Pages will get eventually blocked in any case. I'm just saying that we make mutual peace and not to each other, because then the other party will have to defend itself - and the battleground only continues. What I'm proposing is the only (voluntary) way to end the battleground once and for all. I don't think we have much choice here. Unless we both want to get indeffed. ] (]) 19:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::What violations on my part are you talking about? I did not violate the ban and only posted my opinion on AE (in response to statement by Russavia). If you feel you have to defend yourself, that's your right. But ''I am not at war with anyone to accept "offers of piece".''] (]) 20:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Well I'm not surprised that you reject my offer, but at least I've tried now. ] (]) 20:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Rejecting what? I am not in "state of war" with you and never was. There is nothing to reject.] (]) 20:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Sure, but some people here look inconsistent, calling people names and asking loaded questions isn't disengaging. I don't mind, of course, but they should. Anyway, who cares. It doesn't take a Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance to collaborate. ] (]) 19:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 23:40, 20 May 2018
---
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Pfam domains
Template:Pfam domains has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Glutamate permease for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Glutamate permease is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Glutamate permease until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 23:40, 20 May 2018 (UTC)