| Revision as of 22:26, 9 November 2007 editSirFozzie (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,149 edits Probation← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:53, 13 November 2007 edit undoCobos (talk | contribs)8 edits →Nazi Economic policyNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| ] = Archived material from 10 May 2006 to 10 November 2006. | ] = Archived material from 10 May 2006 to 10 November 2006. | ||
| == Nazi Economic policy== | |||
| Hi, I was reading the discussion of the ] page, and I noticed your imput concening the theory that the Nazis were, in practice, socialists. My father and I have been engaged in an ongoing argument as to the validity of this theory, which he believes to be part of the academic community's effort to "demonize the right" by associating conservatives with Nazis. I think he's full of crap. i was wondering if you could point me in the direction of any information dealing with why the Nazis, in practice, were not socialists. most discussions deal with Hitler's social and political dealings, but not with his economic actions. Making it hard to prove that Hitler did not nationalize industrys and so forth. Thank you! ] (I don't know how the UTC time works, but its 4:23 in the morning pacific time) <small>—Preceding ] was added at 12:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Revision as of 10:53, 13 November 2007
I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms Template:Userpage otheruse
| This is MarkThomas's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
/archive1 = Archived material from 10 May 2006 to 10 November 2006.
"Zionist conspiracy" comment at Talk:Adolf Hitler
I just wanted to let you know that the "Zionist conspiracy" comment at Talk:Adolf Hitler was made by abusive sockpuppet impersonator AmeriquÉ (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), not by the legitimate user Amerique (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). szyslak (t, c)
Heinrich Himmler
Sorry about that. Monthneedbe 15:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Mark - I don't understand. I did not make any sweeping changes the second time. I only made syntax/grammar corrections and added the fact/POV tags that you yourself suggested. If there is anything in particular that I did wrong, please let me know, otherwise I don't see what the problem is. I hope you will only revert factually inaccurate items. Monthneedbe 16:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- OK, yes, I was slightly over-reacting maybe now that I've had time to review your changes more carefully. However, I feel that you have placed POV tags in places where frankly it's hard to arrive at a "neutral" position about a subject that is absolutely certain to be highly prejudicial in the sense that it's hard to write an article about Himmler that does not state his crimes. I think you need to be more specific about the aspects you regard as POV - we've had many of the same debates on other Nazi leader articles and ended up removing the neutrality tagging. I ask again though - are you a new editor? You've been on WP for 2 days (apparently) yet appear very competent. Of course, you may just be a quick study! But then again.... maybe not. MarkThomas 16:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I was not privy to any of the Nazi leader articles debates and if the neutrality tag is inappropriate please feel free to remove it. I guess as a Jewish person I kind of feel passionately about this subject. I have friends and co-workers who use Misplaced Pages and who introduced me to it. I am 42 years old, so I should be competent. If that makes me a "quick study", so be it. I guess I am more of a dinosaur on this site. Monthneedbe 16:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Oh I forgot. I did edit in the past before I registered a username. That count? Btw, what is "standard civility supervision"? (I couldn't help but notice the above). Monthneedbe 16:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- My guess is - you know! :-) Anyway, it's very civil to request that you not remove large amounts of material carefully constructed over a long period from a key article without at least some discussion. Thanks. MarkThomas 16:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Blocked
And unblocked again. I am sorry! That was some time ago & I got my dates wrong. I do apologise! - Alison 01:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
|
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/MarkThomas for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.Template:Do not delete One Night In Hackney303 17:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Probation
Since User:LiberalViews has been blocked by admin User:JzG at This SSP Report as a sockpuppet under your control, the probation that User:LiberalViews was under now applies to you. Per the ArbCom ruling:
Terms of probation
2) Participants placed on probation are limited to one revert per article per week with respect to the set of articles included in the probation. Any participant may be briefly banned for personal attacks or incivility. Reversion of edits by anonymous IPs do not count as a revert.
Passed 7-0 at 08:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC) SirFozzie 22:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)