| Revision as of 02:10, 6 November 2007 editQuackGuru (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users79,978 edits warnings (thank you for your cooperation← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:12, 6 November 2007 edit undoRandom user 39849958 (talk | contribs)19,517 edits removing harrassment by known harrasserNext edit → | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
| {{{1|]}}} hopes that you are joyful! Joy promotes ] and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the Wikilove by melting the clouds of sin and sadness that weigh down someone else. Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing! {{{2|}}} <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message. | {{{1|]}}} hopes that you are joyful! Joy promotes ] and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the Wikilove by melting the clouds of sin and sadness that weigh down someone else. Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing! {{{2|}}} <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message. | ||
| </div> | </div> | ||
| ==improper use of minor check box while you were using TW (second warning)== | |||
| {{{icon|] }}}Please remember to mark your edits{{#if:{{{1|}}}|, such as your recent edits to ],}} as '''m'''inor when (and only when) they genuinely are minor edits (see ]). Marking a major change as a minor one (and vice versa) is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:uw-minor --> Agreed? | |||
| Please stop with your ad hominem/bad faith edit summary towards me. Levine2112 wrote, You are not assuming good faith with me. ]] 02:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:12, 6 November 2007
 Archives |
|---|
Starting fresh
Winter is almost here. Time to archive.
Warning
- Can you please be more specific? What edit(s) are you referring to? -- Levine2112 18:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Another of his lousy threats, huh! who does he think he is? As I said before, this is NOT simply a personal conduct matter it involves the whole of the editors who edit the homeopathy article. As the only one of them now left with much insider knowledge of homeopathy (over a 29 year period) I find it especially sickening to have to deal with such folks, who actually know very little about the subject they pontificate upon so eagerly. So moving all that to his talk page shifts it under the carpet as it were. thanks Peter morrell 19:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Still, better avenues to take are WP:RFC/U or even a simple WP:AN/I report. Posting personal grievances against other editors on article talk space will just reflect poorly on you. -- Levine2112 20:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- That was possibly not the best warning template to use, for which I apologise - there's a funny jump between ones talking about "tests being reverted" and that one that... probably could use another level. But I do think that you should be a bit more careful not to remove the context of a criticism where it's relevant, and try to calm down a little with regards to Quackwatch. Adam Cuerden 22:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- What? Levine? In trouble? No. Not him. Some other user but not him. I know Levine and I don't think he did anything wrong--Angel David 00:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Question
Hello Levine2112:
I hope I'm not a nuisance with this question. My only excuse is I'm trying to figure out what is happening with the Homeopathy business.
I'm guessing that Adam's warning to you above might have something to do with the Homeopathy article, but I can't figure out what he was objecting to.
I'm wondering if you know, and if so, whether you would mind sharing the information?
Thanks, Wanderer57 02:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- This had nothing to do with Homeopathy specifically, but rather the criticism section of The National Council Against Health Fraud. It appears to have been a misunderstanding on Adam's part, for which he graciously recognized and removed said warning from my page. Anyhow, we could use some fresh eyes at The National Council Against Health Fraud. Currently we are exploring the ACA criticism of the NCAHF and trying to mold it actually into criticism of the NCAHF rather than criticism of chiropractic. -- Levine2112 16:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Rejoyce
Angel David hopes that you are joyful! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the Wikilove by melting the clouds of sin and sadness that weigh down someone else. Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.