24.45.42.125 (talk) |
→IPs are people too: new section |
||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
::I responded [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wtmitchell#.5BFocus_on_the_Family.5D here]. I have no objection to your removing this section and the warning it contains from your talk page if you desire to do so. [[User:Wtmitchell|Wtmitchell]] [[User talk:Wtmitchell|(talk)]] <small>(earlier ''Boracay Bill'')</small> 06:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC) |
::I responded [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wtmitchell#.5BFocus_on_the_Family.5D here]. I have no objection to your removing this section and the warning it contains from your talk page if you desire to do so. [[User:Wtmitchell|Wtmitchell]] [[User talk:Wtmitchell|(talk)]] <small>(earlier ''Boracay Bill'')</small> 06:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::Thanks, but I'll let it stay. I don't feel comfortable burying my own history, and there's no shame in the two of us resolving this amicably. [[Special:Contributions/24.45.42.125|24.45.42.125]] ([[User talk:24.45.42.125#top|talk]]) 07:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC) |
:::Thanks, but I'll let it stay. I don't feel comfortable burying my own history, and there's no shame in the two of us resolving this amicably. [[Special:Contributions/24.45.42.125|24.45.42.125]] ([[User talk:24.45.42.125#top|talk]]) 07:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC) |
||
== [[WP:IPs are human too|IPs are people too]] == |
|||
I always feel bad when I see IP editors getting [[WP:DTR|Templated]] and [[WP:BITE|Bitten]] repeatedly as if they are some inferior type of editor. I'm sorry for this, and hope you won't be too put off by it. <span style="font-family:times; font-size:10.2pt">~[[User:Adjwilley|Adjwilley]]</span> <span style="font-family:times; font-size:7pt">([[User talk:Adjwilley|talk]])</span> 15:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:07, 20 July 2012
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Unconstructive; Mass reverts generally frowned on
Hi; noticed your mass revert of several referenced and justified edits in the Sandra Fluke article. Also noticed a short edit history, so am assuming good faith, that you may be unfamiliar with WP process. It is not generally a good idea to mass revert, especially when individual edits are justified, as there is no way to know what editorial judgement you are contesting. Indiscriminately hitting the "undo" button, called reverting, is called edit warring, and can result in automatic bans. For instance, the biography section that was edited was clipped to remove sections that are poorly sourced, and thus not allowed according to BLP guidelines. This should NOT be reverted unless you have a good source to justify these sections. Reverting minor edits, such as specifying that Fluke was a law student when invited to Congress, can be seen as disruptive also, and subject to banning. Am going to undo your reversion of my edits; don't mind if you then make JUSTIFIED, stepwise alterations - it is understood that editors may disagree. I would however direct you to the rather extensive discussions on Talk (where discussions of edits should take place) where NPOV compromises were made, and from which I took several stable (ie agreed upon) descriptions. Good luck, and welcome to Wikipedia. --209.6.69.227 (talk) 02:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, but your changes were correctly reverted by someone else for adding bias. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Just to say...
I loved your edit summary here. Arc de Ciel (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 22:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Good work on the zombies
I liked what you did for p-zombies and physicalism, btw.—Machine Elf 1735 00:15, 16 July 2012 (UTC) Oh ye of little faith... 06:41, 7 July 2012 (Needs citations, not your memory.)—Machine Elf 1735 00:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you, and please don't take my comment personally. I was encouraging you to bring citations, not discouraging you from using your memory. :-) 24.45.42.125 (talk) 01:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not at all, I was admiring what you did for Qualia too... and lo! it's you: 06:40, 7 July 2012 LOL... well 125, all I can say is, I hope you'll WP:SIGNUP.—Machine Elf 1735 01:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Please respond to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Positivism#The_death_of_nuance 24.45.42.125 (talk) 01:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not at all, I was admiring what you did for Qualia too... and lo! it's you: 06:40, 7 July 2012 LOL... well 125, all I can say is, I hope you'll WP:SIGNUP.—Machine Elf 1735 01:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
A false accusation by someone caught in a lie.
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belchfire (talk • contribs) 04:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Belch, you're not being very honest. First, I caught you removing a dollar amount that the citation supported by lying about the citation. Second, you're accusing me of edit-warring when you've repeatedly edited against consensus. Please, even a shred of logic is enough to show that an article on political activism shouldn't be about unrelated philanthropy. So, in conclusion, I'm going to take your warning with a few grains of salt. Thank you. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 04:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belchfire (talk • contribs) 04:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- No, there isn't. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 04:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Ok, it is 'now', but it doesn't make any sense. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 05:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- (Just realized you were still on my watchlist.) In general, you're expected not to make multiple reverts on the same article even if you're correct, and even if other people are doing it as well. You haven't violated the three-revert rule (see here), but I understand fewer reverts can still be considered as against the spirit of the rule. Arc de Ciel (talk) 06:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Also, to clarify Lionel's comment - you should probably either defend your edits as justified, or agree to try and avoid similar situations in the future. I don't know enough about the situation to comment on which is better, though. :-) Arc de Ciel (talk) 07:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Arc, thanks for your input. As it turns out, I've been active on the article talk page, while Belchfire has lately just edit-warred against all four people who disagree with him and Collect. I'm pretty sure I didn't break any rules, although I have to admit that the three-revert thing seems really ambiguous. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 07:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, most Wikipedia policies, especially their nuances, are at least somewhat ambiguous (they're more broadly applicable that way). Arc de Ciel (talk) 07:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I don't want to get involved in some huge debate, but I would think that, if you want people to follow rules, you need to make them clear enough so that we know if we're following them. Otherwise, you have to give us the benefit of the doubt. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 08:01, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
July 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Focus on the Family with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:35, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I don't understand your form letter or how it applies to me. Could you please me more specific? 24.45.42.125 (talk) 05:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- I responded here. I have no objection to your removing this section and the warning it contains from your talk page if you desire to do so. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I'll let it stay. I don't feel comfortable burying my own history, and there's no shame in the two of us resolving this amicably. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 07:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- I responded here. I have no objection to your removing this section and the warning it contains from your talk page if you desire to do so. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I always feel bad when I see IP editors getting Templated and Bitten repeatedly as if they are some inferior type of editor. I'm sorry for this, and hope you won't be too put off by it. ~Adjwilley (talk) 15:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)