Revision as of 16:00, 16 January 2009 editIcsunonove (talk | contribs)2,418 edits →Steinerner Steg← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:16, 16 January 2009 edit undoIcsunonove (talk | contribs)2,418 edits →Steinerner StegNext edit → | ||
Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
:: Don't bother John: '']='' - and he has increased his incivility level by a ton today: ]. --] (]) 04:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC) | :: Don't bother John: '']='' - and he has increased his incivility level by a ton today: ]. --] (]) 04:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::You are absolutely disgusting |
:::You are absolutely disgusting accusing me of Italianization, and fascism, you should be permanently banned. I went and have made only good faith edits, and I've always been at the forefront of pushing multilingual names for this region. I've been adding content, while others go and remove. Arrogant people such as you sicken me, and make Misplaced Pages the most unpleasant of places to edit. ] (]) 16:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
* John, I'm happy to take my own leave, editors like this make one not even want to work on Misplaced Pages anymore. ] (]) 16:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC) | * John, I'm happy to take my own leave, editors like this make one not even want to work on Misplaced Pages anymore. ] (]) 16:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:16, 16 January 2009
Image copyright problem with File:Beagle2ontheground.jpgThanks for uploading File:Beagle2ontheground.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Misplaced Pages's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC) AWBPlease stop using AWB to correct spelling. 'honourary' is the correct way to spell the word in the Commonwealth; the general rule is that, if the subject is associated with the Commonwealth, British/Canadian spelling should be used. I've just had to correct a series of these. Ironholds (talk) 00:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
PlutoniumI have edited the talk page (and the article) explaining what I did and why in some detail. I do not think it is terribly controversial. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 04:48, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Stereotypes of white peopleFYI, I've reverted the article to an older version of the article, but am asking for input on whether or not that version should be kept.---Balloonman CSD Survey Results 02:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Call me wishy washyOk, I was asked about deleting Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Stereotypes of white people per G4 because the article up for nom was a somewhat different nom and the august 27th version I had reverted to was not the same article nominated on August 28th. I've reopened the debate and invite you to put in your two cents concerning the reverted to version. The version as of Jan 3 was a clear G10.---Balloonman CSD Survey Results 04:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC) AN/I noticeThe interaction between yourself and ThuranX has prompted this AN/I discussion. - Arcayne () 17:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
BarnstarThe Barnstar of Integrity
Question on page movesI replied on my talk. --cremepuff222 (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC) The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Pinter article MediationWould welcome your input at Talk:harold Pinter#Mediation. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC) DelinkingA discussion at Lightmouse's house may be of interest to you. Ohconfucius (talk) 05:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC) OiYou said, "but please don't talk to anyone who edits here again." Are you serious?? hah. Listen John, I apologize for finally losing my cool with Noclador, but you should really review what he was doing to that article. This wasn't anything to do with naming, this was him removing valid references, and then adding political diatribes without any proper citation. Then he was adding in information about a "province of South Tyrol" which has never existed. His actions were not civil as well if you look into it, and I hope you gave him a warning as well. In general, it is not necessary for users on Misplaced Pages to make accounts, and anon. users should not be treated as second class. Good day to you, and I actually do appreciate you coming in and helping settle things down. I think the other user "Ma" will bring back the removed citations and a balance to the article. 192.45.72.26 (talk) 17:43, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
User 81.102.233.188 - repeated vandalismJohn, User 81.102.233.188 is at it again - you've warned him twice before regarding vandalism.You gave him a final warning on Jan 2nd after he vandalised the Bill Struth page and now he's at it again - so far in the last 24 hours he has made 20+ vandalising edits to biographical information in the "Steven Appiah" entry! Both myself and another user have attempted to remove the erroneous information he has repeatedly posted but he re-vandalises the page as soon as someone corrects it (within five minutes!) Reading through his discussion page it seems he only ever contributes to Wiki to vandalise pages and post false information passed off as fact - in light of this could you prevent him from editing? Thanks, keep up the good work fella! Ed Cohen, London, UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.38.106 (talk) 03:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC) Steinerner StegHi John, I notice you are an Administrator and went to this page. For better or worse, I got involved in this recent "editing" of Steinerner Steg. I tried my best to go in and create a neutral article, and write it respecting all the citations. The last edit I saw just didn't look professionally written and seemed POV'ish. Now no matter what I do, I get critisized. I know it is good to have thick skin on Misplaced Pages, but constant reverts claiming "vandalism", or saying on the discussion page that I'm trying to discredit the mayor of Merano is really offensive. Could you assist on this, or help mediate? Or at least tell us how we should be doing things? I'm in awe (and not in a good way :) by these two editors Noclador and Gun Powder Ma. If I say the mayor "suggests", I'm bad. If I say "according to", I'm bad. @_@ That is how as an academic we reference others' work! thank you, Icsunonove (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
|