| Revision as of 18:55, 29 December 2012 editHex (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators25,309 edits Last warning.← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:43, 29 December 2012 edit undoSpideog (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Rollbackers27,214 editsm →Minor edits, again: RHT-47A-34QNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| :::<span class="plainlinks"></span>, perhaps? ] – which you should have already done, by the way – and learn about edit summaries and then come back if you want my help. ] (]) 14:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | :::<span class="plainlinks"></span>, perhaps? ] – which you should have already done, by the way – and learn about edit summaries and then come back if you want my help. ] (]) 14:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Touch a nerve, did I? Keep taking the piss and see what happens. — ] ] 18:55, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | ::::Touch a nerve, did I? Keep taking the piss and see what happens. — ] ] 18:55, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::::The nerve touched was yours, wasn't it? Because pointing out your hypocrisy is not "taking the piss". Go read the edit summary information then come back and tell me ''precisely'' what part of it you ''think'' I violated (hint: not any of it). Then we can have a discussion. ] (]) 19:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:43, 29 December 2012
Minor edits, again
I'm trying my best to assume good faith here, but this is not an appropriate use of the minor edit label. Likewise, the edit summary you specified was completely insufficient. — Hex (❝?!❞) 17:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- The "RK" in the edit summary stands for "Rüdesheimer Kaffee". Please revert if the edit is wrong. — O'Dea (talk) 19:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I'm aware of that. A cryptic acronym of content you've added to an article is not a valid edit summary. Please familiarize yourself with the correct use of the feature. — Hex (❝?!❞) 14:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Something really helpful like this, perhaps? Go here – which you should have already done, by the way – and learn about edit summaries and then come back if you want my help. — O'Dea (talk) 14:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Touch a nerve, did I? Keep taking the piss and see what happens. — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:55, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- The nerve touched was yours, wasn't it? Because pointing out your hypocrisy is not "taking the piss". Go read the edit summary information then come back and tell me precisely what part of it you think I violated (hint: not any of it). Then we can have a discussion. — O'Dea (talk) 19:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Touch a nerve, did I? Keep taking the piss and see what happens. — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:55, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Something really helpful like this, perhaps? Go here – which you should have already done, by the way – and learn about edit summaries and then come back if you want my help. — O'Dea (talk) 14:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I'm aware of that. A cryptic acronym of content you've added to an article is not a valid edit summary. Please familiarize yourself with the correct use of the feature. — Hex (❝?!❞) 14:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
