Misplaced Pages

User talk:Neotarf: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:44, 12 August 2014 view source184.66.160.91 (talk) retired users don't spend all day stirring up shit. Revert if you are using some definition of "retired" I am not familiar with← Previous edit Revision as of 01:47, 12 August 2014 view source Unbroken Chain (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers32,193 edits Reverted to revision 620850649 by Tutelary (talk): Not apporpriate. (TW)Next edit →
Line 15: Line 15:
*] (including link to discussion about "retired" banner) *] (including link to discussion about "retired" banner)
*] Wikimania civility speech, August 2014 *] Wikimania civility speech, August 2014

{{Retired}}


== Query, and request == == Query, and request ==

Revision as of 01:47, 12 August 2014

Subpages:

Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.

Query, and request

Why do you display a "retired" banner, yet continue to contribute? Though I see you don't really work on articles any more. This edit summary shows a real misunderstanding; read NYB's explanation again, more carefully, to see why this sort of argument actually disproves the argument you say you wish to make. I also agree with Bishzilla that we can call out passive-aggressive behaviour such as yours, without breaking NPA or even CIVIL. I think I see what you are trying to do, and I think your intentions are good; but please consider whether your current actions are promoting your avowed aims or holding them back. --John (talk) 09:56, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 22:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration case request declined

An arbitration case request in which you were named as a party has been declined by the Arbitration Committee. The arbitrators views on hearing this matter, found here, may be useful. For the arbitration committee, --S Philbrick(Talk) 15:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC)