Revision as of 01:26, 2 April 2007 editIrishguy (talk | contribs)45,851 edits →Personal attacks: reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:29, 2 April 2007 edit undoOrangemarlin (talk | contribs)30,771 edits →Personal attacksNext edit → | ||
Line 124: | Line 124: | ||
::Frankly, your attempts at discourse with him/her are often highly inflammatory. Please keep things ]. <font color="Green">]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">]</font></sup> 01:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC) | ::Frankly, your attempts at discourse with him/her are often highly inflammatory. Please keep things ]. <font color="Green">]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">]</font></sup> 01:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::I'm not sure if you have read my edits, but at first I had a high level of ] with the editor. Then I noted a huge number of highly POV edits to articles, and then several comments by him that indicated his belief set. I don't like to be tricked. I will take your recommendations, but I'm pretty upset at his methodology. He has constantly reverted my edits. He has constantly inferred that I have "stalked" him. I will continue to revert his POV edits. I'll keep the commentary to myself. ] 01:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:29, 2 April 2007
|
Archives |
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar | ||
For being bold and because I can't believe you haven't got one yet! Sophia 16:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC) |
References
You are AWESOME!!!
The E=mc² Barnstar | ||
You might not know me, but I know you. I've seen you editing articles about evolution, and I just wanted to say thank you so much for contributing so much to Evolution articles and reverting vandalism and original research, among other things. I love you! Keep up the good fight! Ķĩřβȳ♥♥♥ŤįɱéØ 17:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC) |
Re: discussion and consensus can lead to knowledge:
Absolutely. But I can bet that while you were sitting around having those discussions, you were talking about the *separation column*, and not arguing about how you were going to decide who was going to operate it, and who wasn't going to operate it, and how one person built the column one way but it didn't satisfy everyone and so we had it destroyed (several times), and what the politically correct etiquette of protein fractionation is, and a lengthy explanation of the controversy behind all that etiquette, its history, and all the etiquette mistakes that were ever made in the field of protein fractionation, accompanied by hyper-linked references to the online protein fractionation manual of protocol (also impossibly dense), and peppered with all conceivable kinds of passive-aggressive, nonprofessional and nonacademic drama that didn't get anyone anywhere. Nope, my guess is that you discussed, kept *on topic*, and finally -- *took action* and built the thing, did your work, and moved on. Question: now that I've followed protocol and taken many suggestions to the Evolution Talk page, how does the "consensus" and "progress" process unfold now, resulting in a constructive edit to the article that won't immediately be reverted? THAT is the part of Misplaced Pages protocol I would be interested in witnessing, in action. Thanks,Mandaclair 00:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
"Teaching your grandmother to suck eggs" :)
:) Guettarda 06:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
treasure ships
hi there, I responded to your comment on treasure ships —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Intranetusa (talk • contribs) 23:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC).
Block request
I've requested that you be blocked from editing at WP:ANI. You may wish to comment there. Gnixon 01:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Fine. Whatever. You are a creationist, and now you are using an attempt to silence my personal feeling that you are. You are a most amusing editor. Orangemarlin 01:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Personal attacks
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please don't make edits like this. IrishGuy 01:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Then this editor should come clean with his reasons for his highly inflammatory and POV edits to articles. Orangemarlin 01:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Frankly, your attempts at discourse with him/her are often highly inflammatory. Please keep things civil. IrishGuy 01:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if you have read my edits, but at first I had a high level of WP:AGF with the editor. Then I noted a huge number of highly POV edits to articles, and then several comments by him that indicated his belief set. I don't like to be tricked. I will take your recommendations, but I'm pretty upset at his methodology. He has constantly reverted my edits. He has constantly inferred that I have "stalked" him. I will continue to revert his POV edits. I'll keep the commentary to myself. Orangemarlin 01:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)