→1RR on abortion-related articles: new section |
Orangemarlin (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
Just as an FYI, abortion-related articles are currently subject to 1RR (meaning no more than 1 revert in a 24-hour period per editor). Reverts are often construed pretty loosely, so I just wanted to let you know given the recent back-and-forth editing with regard to the controversial image, so you don't run afoul of the 1RR inadvertently. '''[[User:MastCell|MastCell]]''' <sup>[[User Talk:MastCell|Talk]]</sup> 23:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC) |
Just as an FYI, abortion-related articles are currently subject to 1RR (meaning no more than 1 revert in a 24-hour period per editor). Reverts are often construed pretty loosely, so I just wanted to let you know given the recent back-and-forth editing with regard to the controversial image, so you don't run afoul of the 1RR inadvertently. '''[[User:MastCell|MastCell]]''' <sup>[[User Talk:MastCell|Talk]]</sup> 23:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC) |
||
Thats 2RR PK. Just because you have an unsupported opinion about a photo that has no rights, that had no verification and had no explanation, does not mean we actually listen to you. We don't. Let me make this clear. Abortion is legal. Bah. [[User:Orangemarlin|<font color="orange">'''Orange'''</font><font color="teal">'''Marlin'''</font>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Orangemarlin|Talk•]] [[Special:Contributions/Orangemarlin|Contributions]]</sup></small> 00:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:42, 21 June 2011
|
Invitation
--Grrrlriot (♠ ♣ ♦ ♥ †) 18:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Mother Teresa Catholic Secondary School has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 22:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Your recent edit to Cat senses
Whoa, calm down! There's really no need to get this worked up over a single picture. Remember that it's better to fix the problem or discuss it on the relevant talk page than it is to attack another editor in an edit summary. - Jredmond (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
No Personal Attacks warning
PLease dn't make personal attacks on Wikipedia, as you did here [1] [2]. It's always better to discuss matters civilly. Good luck! Dayewalker (talk) 01:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Just as an FYI, abortion-related articles are currently subject to 1RR (meaning no more than 1 revert in a 24-hour period per editor). Reverts are often construed pretty loosely, so I just wanted to let you know given the recent back-and-forth editing with regard to the controversial image, so you don't run afoul of the 1RR inadvertently. MastCell Talk 23:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Thats 2RR PK. Just because you have an unsupported opinion about a photo that has no rights, that had no verification and had no explanation, does not mean we actually listen to you. We don't. Let me make this clear. Abortion is legal. Bah. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)