Revision as of 22:05, 25 September 2009 edit98.248.33.198 (talk) Undid revision 316202874 by 82.19.59.30 (talk)← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:10, 4 November 2009 edit undoEpeefleche (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers150,049 edits →Over the line commentsNext edit → | ||
Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
==Over the line comments== | ==Over the line comments== | ||
That's not for you to decide. Step off.] (]) 15:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC) | That's not for you to decide. Step off.] (]) 15:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
==Naming Conventions. RFC: Removal of exceptions to "use common names" passage.== | |||
This is to inform you that removing exceptions to the use of "most Common Names" as the titles of Misplaced Pages articles from the the ] policy page, is the subject of a referral for Comment (RfC). This follows recent changes by some editors. | |||
You are being informed as an editor previously involved in discussion of these issues relevant to that policy page. You are invited to comment at . ]] 21:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Rjanag Conduct RfC == | |||
A has been opened concerning the conduct of ]. This follows the of a number of arbitrators at the . I am contacting you because you previously participated in the underlying referenced Ottava Rima AN/I. | |||
The RfC can be found . | |||
Editors (including those who certify the RfC) can offer comments by: | |||
:(a) ''posting their own view''; and/or | |||
:(b) ''endorsing'' one or more views of others. | |||
You may certify or endorse the original RfC statement. You may also endorse as many views as you wish, including Rjanag's response. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties or inside parties. | |||
Information on the RfC process can be found at: | |||
:#] | |||
:#] | |||
:#] | |||
:#] | |||
Thanks.--] (]) 21:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:10, 4 November 2009
Archive - Through July 31, 2006 Archive - Aug 06 - Dec 08
Eh?
You said something about me "formally stamping my comment"... what comment? o.0 -Aguyuno (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC).
Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandal on my talk page :D Matt (Talk) 03:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
WikiLove
Jake Wartenberg has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Thanks for reverting vandalism to my user page! Cheers, Jake Wartenberg 19:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Jason Chong
thanks for your help with disambiguating Jason Chong.
PabloZ (talk) 02:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
For reverting vandalism on my talkpage. Call me Bubba (talk) 03:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
Protected and unprotected DYK pages
Hi Vary, I'm not sure if you are still watching the ANI thread or not, so just so you know, I tried to answer your questions about DYK (and why the Next update page is not protected) here and here...I hope that makes things a bit clearer. Best, Politizer /contribs 06:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
page blanking is not always BAD, think before revert
When the only content author of a page blanks the content, it is considered to be a request for deletion, and should be dealt with by placing a ((db-author)) speedy delete tag, NOT by reverting, as you did at BrightHouse.
Please check edit histories before reverting, it only takes a few seconds using popups.
(please, no excuses about how huggle doesn't allow this or that, you are just as responsible for your script based (huggle/twinkle, etc) edits, as you are for your manual edits) Wuhwuzdat (talk) 17:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- For the record, the above is regarding a page that I deleted under G7 shortly after the revert in question. Lest anyone should think I don't follow up on script-assisted edits. -- Vary Talk
Proposed deletion of Velcro dog
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Velcro dog, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- dicdef of a slang term; no potential for expansion
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Psychonaut (talk) 13:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Talk page
Thank you for reverting it :D cf38 19:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
fictional age regression
I admit I was just using an experienced guess when I told you to look, but i just now did find quite a few.DGG (talk) 04:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Kevin Covais
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Kevin Covais. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kevin Covais. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
3R Warning
Please read the talk page of the article you are referring to. I AM attempting to resolve the matter peacefully, and you will see my post there pre-dates your warning. If you would care to participate, perhaps even to mediate the dispute, you would be welcome to do so. Rain City Blues (talk) 15:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Again, before you start throwing accusations, lets try to keep the focus on the topic, not on the people you disagree with. If the best you can manage is a personal attack, I'd be happy to bring in an admin that is not quite so biased to resolve the matter according to wiki guidelines.
About that revert . . .
. . . had to undo it. Crafty (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Discussed on ANI
Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sister_Kitty_Catalyst_O.C.P..2C DJ_Pusspuss.2C_Benjamin_Holman.2C_and_an_editor_who_shall_remain_nameless Ikip (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- He continues to make his assumptions on the ANI, and I continue to revert them. Ikip (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Over the line comments
That's not for you to decide. Step off.Rain City Blues (talk) 15:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Naming Conventions. RFC: Removal of exceptions to "use common names" passage.
This is to inform you that removing exceptions to the use of "most Common Names" as the titles of Misplaced Pages articles from the the Talk:Naming_Conventions policy page, is the subject of a referral for Comment (RfC). This follows recent changes by some editors.
You are being informed as an editor previously involved in discussion of these issues relevant to that policy page. You are invited to comment at this location. Xandar 21:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag Conduct RfC
A Request for Comments has been opened concerning the conduct of Rjanag. This follows the suggestion of a number of arbitrators at the Rjanag RfA. I am contacting you because you previously participated in the underlying referenced Ottava Rima AN/I.
The RfC can be found here.
Editors (including those who certify the RfC) can offer comments by:
- (a) posting their own view; and/or
- (b) endorsing one or more views of others.
You may certify or endorse the original RfC statement. You may also endorse as many views as you wish, including Rjanag's response. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties or inside parties.
Information on the RfC process can be found at:
Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)