| Revision as of 00:04, 15 April 2005 edit192.104.181.229 (talk) →[]: Response.← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:07, 15 April 2005 edit undo192.104.181.229 (talk) response to prior commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| ::Speaking of blind reverts, your last revert resulted in considerable duplication. Please read the changes that other editors make. Also, please reference your assertions about mental illnesses. Cheers, -] 07:01, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) | ::Speaking of blind reverts, your last revert resulted in considerable duplication. Please read the changes that other editors make. Also, please reference your assertions about mental illnesses. Cheers, -] 07:01, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ::: The revert in question was not a complete duplicate, since you cut out most of the stuff which was the reason for the revert. Also, I went back and fixed it, and am now recieving blind reverts from Ant. and warnings that '''I''' might be breaking rules while he's doing these blind reverts. | |||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
Revision as of 00:07, 15 April 2005
Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Lexi merwin may not be well-known enough to merit articles of their own. The Misplaced Pages community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. By starting an account or logging in, each user is entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects.
Zzyzx11 | Talk 00:23, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The Merwin article can go. Sorry about that. This IP is shared by the campus, so please don't assume all things posted are by the same person.
Could you please discuss your issues with Citizens Commission on Human Rights on that articles's talk page, instead of mindlessly reverting? Doing so gets us nowhere. Thanks -Willmcw 20:38, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
- The CCHR page: no. I will not stand for my comments to be blindly erased and then to be punished for blindly erasing those. If Misplaced Pages is going to provide ANY use in the future, it needs to be open to the public and not controlled by a select few.
- Your edits are not being "blindly" erased, they are being edited in a collaborative process. Please be a part of that process by participating in the talk page discussions concerning that article, and raising your issues there. Thanks, -Willmcw 22:46, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Speaking of blind reverts, your last revert resulted in considerable duplication. Please read the changes that other editors make. Also, please reference your assertions about mental illnesses. Cheers, -Willmcw 07:01, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
- The revert in question was not a complete duplicate, since you cut out most of the stuff which was the reason for the revert. Also, I went back and fixed it, and am now recieving blind reverts from Ant. and warnings that I might be breaking rules while he's doing these blind reverts.
WP:3RR
Please acquaint yourself with the three-revert rule. You're coming very close to breaking it at CCHR. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:53, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
My revisions have been either been modifications, and not complete revisions, or complete revisions when key parts of the page have been removed. I have tried meeting people in the middle with notes such as "it is unlikely that all physiciartrists can be called" but as soon as I take a step towards the middle, it seems that everyone else takes a step back. If Misplaced Pages is going to be run by an elite group and not the public as equals, then it's just going to end up comming to a dead-end.
Further, if I am in any threat of violating this rule by undoing your unjustified revisions (claiming something is silly is not a justification) over my modifications, then you are even closer to breaking the rule. Please don't attempt to threaten me.