AuburnPilot (talk | contribs) autoblock lifted as direct block lifted as well |
Corticopia (talk | contribs) m deleting verbiage re precipitous admin actions |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
::Likewise. Such a ridiculous thing to have such an argument over! (And while it seems kind of silly to me to have an entire subsection for Antiquity, rather than just bolding it so it stands out, I really don't care that much one way or the other to fight over that ''too'', especially since it accomplishes the same thing either way.) |
::Likewise. Such a ridiculous thing to have such an argument over! (And while it seems kind of silly to me to have an entire subsection for Antiquity, rather than just bolding it so it stands out, I really don't care that much one way or the other to fight over that ''too'', especially since it accomplishes the same thing either way.) |
||
::As for perfectionism... I tend to overuse the preview button. I also (usually) tend to avoid high-traffic articles, because I've already encountered quite enough edit conflicts when I take too long on the low-traffic ones. Those aren't fun. -[[User:Bbik|Bbik]] 03:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC) |
::As for perfectionism... I tend to overuse the preview button. I also (usually) tend to avoid high-traffic articles, because I've already encountered quite enough edit conflicts when I take too long on the low-traffic ones. Those aren't fun. -[[User:Bbik|Bbik]] 03:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
<div style="background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px solid red; padding: 3px;"> |
|||
==Regarding reversions[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyprus&action=history] made on [[April 20]] [[2007]] to [[Cyprus]]== |
|||
<div class="user-block"> [[Image:Octagon-warning.svg|left|30px| ]] |
|||
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.</div><!-- Template:3RR5 --> The duration of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User:Corticopia&action=edit block] is 72 hours. '''[[User:Nishkid64|<span style="background:#009;color:#7FFF00">Nish</span><span style="background:cyan;color:#009">kid</span>]][[User talk:Nishkid64|<span style="background:orange;color:navy blue">64</span>]]''' 20:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)</div> |
|||
:What are you talking about? Please provide evidence of this -- I have not edit-warred and have thoroughly discussed everything throughout on that talk page, while the other editor has not. I demand that this block be retracted, and reviewed by another administrator. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] 20:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
{{unblock reviewed|1=See above, as a result of my report, I was blocked, despite no evidence or argumentation being provided to justify this block.|decline=By requesting the other user to be blocked for edit warring, you opened yourself up to investigation. You edit warred as well and were blocked for it. — '''[[User:Cbrown1023|<font color="green">Cbrown1023</font>]]''' <small>'''<font color="#002bb8">[[User talk:Cbrown1023|talk]]</font>'''</small> 20:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)}} |
|||
::Please provide and cite evidence of this in this instance. Again, I have thoroughly discussed edits on the talk page and through edit summaries. Until this is substantiated, I will continue to place this request for unblocking, and count on complicit admins who do not fully justify their actions to be held to account for indiscriminant actions. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] 21:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
{| align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: none; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;" |
|||
|- |
|||
| valign="top" style="padding: 0.1em" | {{tick|40}} |
|||
| style="padding: 0.1em" | |
|||
'''Your request to be unblocked''' has been '''granted''' for the following reason(s): |
|||
<br><br>Please accept my apologies, Corticopia. While I was reviewing the article history, I saw you had made four reverts, but I had forgot to look closely at the timing of each edit. You made four reverts over a period of 28 hours, which means you did not violate 3RR. Again, please accept my apology for the inconvenience. |
|||
''Request handled by:'' '''[[User:Nishkid64|<span style="background:#009;color:#7FFF00">Nish</span><span style="background:cyan;color:#009">kid</span>]][[User talk:Nishkid64|<span style="background:orange;color:navy blue">64</span>]]''' 21:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Request accepted (after-block request) --> |
|||
|} |
|||
:TY -- please exercise better judgement in the future. As well, I am currently using IP 65.95.239.134, (through which I am now editing), which remains blocked. Please rectify -- thanks. [[User:Corticopia|Corticopia]] 21:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
{| align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: none; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;" |
|||
|- |
|||
| valign="top" style="padding: 0.1em" | {{tick|40}} |
|||
| style="padding: 0.1em" | |
|||
'''Your request to be unblocked''' has been '''granted''' for the following reason(s): |
|||
<br><br>[[Wikipedia:Autoblock|Autoblock]] of [[User talk:65.95.239.134|65.95.239.134]] lifted or expired. |
|||
''Request handled by:'' - '''[[User:AuburnPilot|<font color="mediumblue">auburn</font><font color="darkorange">pilot</font>]]''' [[User_talk:AuburnPilot|<small>talk</small>]] 22:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Request accepted (after-block request) --> |
|||
|} |
|||
:Cutting it pretty close, though... [[User:Kafziel|Kafziel]] <sup>[[User talk:Kafziel|Talk]]</sup> 21:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:38, 21 April 2007
Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)
♠TomasBat (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 21:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorting table at Asia
Sortability is very useful here, you can have the largest country first, etc. So I suppose your objection is the division by region which after sorting is only restored by refreshing the page. To remedy that we could make a column for the region.--Patrick 13:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Etymology of Mexico
No, I didn't revert your enhancements. I only moved the second paragraph to the beginning. But do as you wish, I won't do anything to the article at all. I am just tying to avoid a useless and frustrating confrontation again. --the Dúnadan 18:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Please see: [1]. The link to the constitution is still there. Like I said, I only moved the second paragraph to the beginning. Since I was expanding the article, I put the "new" name in bold characters (i.e. "the name of Mexico"), which would have complied with the Manual of Style. That would be the only "enhancement" that might have been reverted. The rest, I kept. I still think the article could be improved and expanded by including the diverse names by which Mexico is known as well as some history of other names in disuse (à la Names for Germany, Canada's Name, etc.). But the article is good as it is, and I rather avoid the headache of an unnecessary confrontation by simply being bold in an article of which I have been the major editor. Cheers! --the Dúnadan 18:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think I will be able to do it today, but let me expand the article but leave the lead section and title as they are right now (your version). Then we can decide which title suits the content best. I think Toponymy, being the study of the place names of a region, might encompass etymology (that is, etymology could be, arguably, a subfield used in toponymy), in which case, simply "Toponymy of Mexico", while esoteric, might be our best choice. We can also create "Mexico's Name", "Names for Mexico", "Names of Mexico" and "Name of Mexico" as redirects. --the Dúnadan 18:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think you did a good job in handling the MUS - UMS situation. And I think the article has been greatly improved. I don't think I'll add anything else, I will probably just proof-read it. Thanks for your help. --the Dúnadan 17:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think I will be able to do it today, but let me expand the article but leave the lead section and title as they are right now (your version). Then we can decide which title suits the content best. I think Toponymy, being the study of the place names of a region, might encompass etymology (that is, etymology could be, arguably, a subfield used in toponymy), in which case, simply "Toponymy of Mexico", while esoteric, might be our best choice. We can also create "Mexico's Name", "Names for Mexico", "Names of Mexico" and "Name of Mexico" as redirects. --the Dúnadan 18:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Random request
Hi! A very minor question for you: Is there any chance you could perhaps vary your edit summaries a bit? It's fantastic that you're leaving them, however when they are all "comment", it is nearly impossible to tell one apart from another, especially when everyone's posting in such close succession. I'd hate to miss out on a relevant comment for such a silly reason as not realizing I didn't backtrack far enough! -Bbik 03:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, I totally forgot to mention that, didn't I? It was prompted by this. -- Those two strings of comment's are scary! :p And it figures that just as soon as I hit save here, you hit save over there with a different summary, too... -Bbik 03:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Likewise. Such a ridiculous thing to have such an argument over! (And while it seems kind of silly to me to have an entire subsection for Antiquity, rather than just bolding it so it stands out, I really don't care that much one way or the other to fight over that too, especially since it accomplishes the same thing either way.)
- As for perfectionism... I tend to overuse the preview button. I also (usually) tend to avoid high-traffic articles, because I've already encountered quite enough edit conflicts when I take too long on the low-traffic ones. Those aren't fun. -Bbik 03:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)