Hans Adler (talk | contribs) →Notification: new section |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:Hi, no problem. You might even consider following [[WP:1RR]] (I have suggested the same to Hans). Even I don't follow it at times, but when I have I've noticed that it's always yielded better results in a content dispute. As for Bukhari, noted. Hopefully this dispute doesn't get out of hand, what needs to happen is that all parties should follow [[WP:DR]] instead of accusing one another of being the disruptive one. Regards, <tt class="plainlinks">[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoi]][[User talk:Khoikhoi|khoi]]</tt> 08:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC) |
:Hi, no problem. You might even consider following [[WP:1RR]] (I have suggested the same to Hans). Even I don't follow it at times, but when I have I've noticed that it's always yielded better results in a content dispute. As for Bukhari, noted. Hopefully this dispute doesn't get out of hand, what needs to happen is that all parties should follow [[WP:DR]] instead of accusing one another of being the disruptive one. Regards, <tt class="plainlinks">[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoi]][[User talk:Khoikhoi|khoi]]</tt> 08:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC) |
||
== Notification == |
|||
Hello Causteau, clearly Andrew Lancaster has communication problems with you that are very similar to those that I experienced. He started [[Wikipedia:WQA#User:Causteau Policy interpretation. What constitutes a justification to revert edits, and what constitutes an edit war|a thread]] at Wikiquette alerts, a place for informal dispute resolution. I just noticed that he forgot to notify you; I am sure that was not intentional. --[[User:Hans Adler|Hans Adler]] ([[User talk:Hans Adler|talk]]) 22:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:52, 26 October 2008
Warning
Please refrain from edit warring. I'm referring to The Jerusalem Post article, but this also applies to other articles as well. Keep in mind that WP:3RR states, "The rule does not entitle editors to revert a page three times each day. Administrators may still block disruptive editors for edit warring who do not violate the rule." Please discuss your edits (i.e. though the dispute resolution process) instead. Thanks. Khoikhoi 23:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, no problem. You might even consider following WP:1RR (I have suggested the same to Hans). Even I don't follow it at times, but when I have I've noticed that it's always yielded better results in a content dispute. As for Bukhari, noted. Hopefully this dispute doesn't get out of hand, what needs to happen is that all parties should follow WP:DR instead of accusing one another of being the disruptive one. Regards, Khoikhoi 08:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Notification
Hello Causteau, clearly Andrew Lancaster has communication problems with you that are very similar to those that I experienced. He started a thread at Wikiquette alerts, a place for informal dispute resolution. I just noticed that he forgot to notify you; I am sure that was not intentional. --Hans Adler (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)