| Revision as of 02:46, 27 July 2009 editBiofase (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users926 edits →Formatting fix on your comment on ThaddeusB's RfA← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:08, 29 July 2009 edit undoRicoCorinth (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,566 edits →You appear to be involved in an edit war...: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| Hi. I took the liberty of , so that my neutral showed up as the eighth neutral and not the first (as it did .) I hope you're alright with that, since I didn't edit anything else in your comments. ] ] ] 21:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC) | Hi. I took the liberty of , so that my neutral showed up as the eighth neutral and not the first (as it did .) I hope you're alright with that, since I didn't edit anything else in your comments. ] ] ] 21:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :Thanks ] ]|] 02:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC) | :Thanks ] ]|] 02:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == You appear to be involved in an edit war... == | |||
| ... concerning the deletion of content I have put into the ] talk page. Please be aware that continued edit warring may result in your editing privileges being blocked. -- ] 04:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:08, 29 July 2009
Sorry, it was during school and i did not have time to finish what i was saying. Ok, that has cleared it up. I was more seeing the two communities as seperate, wheras everyone can use and edit it. Thanks for that. Stakingsin (talk) 17:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC) i sometimes forget the four swirly things, i will get the hang of it though.
- No problem. :) Biofase (talk) 17:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
partial list of well-respected creationists (who no credible academic has, or would, ever called pseudo-scientists)
So this exchage does not seem off topic. Contributors seem to be talking past each other. --Firefly322 (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
- Firefly322 is wrong (as usual). Bube is a well-known theistic evolutionist, and there is no indication on their articles that Kline, Blocher or Jaki are/were creationists. Given that Creation–evolution controversy neither places quote-marks around 'scientists' nor calls anybody "less than scientists" or "pseudoscientists", both the thread & Biofase's final comment are clearly off-topic, per WP:TALK. A clue would be a wonderful thing (but I doubt if a WP:TROUT would be appreciated, or sufficient to induce one). HrafnStalk(P) 14:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
NPOV/UNDUE discussion
Biofase, I think that an edit conflict caused confusion. My comment about personal remarks was directed towards Dreamguy, not you. Sorry for any confusion, I know my post ended up below yours, so the confusion seems easily understandable. I was just trying to express my opinion that project pages should avoid targeting specific editors. I agree completely that there are issues, but might perhaps disagree on their exact nature and substance. Resolving these differences and achieving consensus is exactly what the discussion is designed to achieve, not where it's supposed to start, so I look forward to further dialogue. Thanks for your patience and understanding, Doc Tropics 17:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
- Quite alright. Was a bit confusing but didn't really take any offence at it. :) Biofase | stalk 18:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Formatting fix on your comment on ThaddeusB's RfA
Hi. I took the liberty of fixing the formatting for your two comments on ThaddeusB's RfA, so that my neutral showed up as the eighth neutral and not the first (as it did here.) I hope you're alright with that, since I didn't edit anything else in your comments. One two three... 21:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Biofase | stalk 02:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
You appear to be involved in an edit war...
... concerning the deletion of content I have put into the WP:NPOV talk page. Please be aware that continued edit warring may result in your editing privileges being blocked. -- Rico 04:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC)