| Revision as of 05:11, 6 March 2010 editMalik Shabazz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers106,163 edits →Is that OK: reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:18, 6 March 2010 edit undoMbz1 (talk | contribs)22,338 edits →Is that OK: I'm starting to understand what Drork meantNext edit → | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
| :::Hi Mbz1. While that particular edit looks odd, what Vexorg did was copy your entire post from Gilabrand's Talk page, signature and all. I don't see anything wrong with that. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 05:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC) | :::Hi Mbz1. While that particular edit looks odd, what Vexorg did was copy your entire post from Gilabrand's Talk page, signature and all. I don't see anything wrong with that. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 05:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
| ::::I've never seen somebody did something like that before. It is misleading. It looks like I made the post in the middle of Vexorg post. In my edit I left my post alone, I only removed my own signature. My signature belongs to me and cannot be copied. To post my signature there is as bizarre as everything the user does, but of course I forgot you see nothing wrong with the user. Oh well...--] (]) 05:18, 6 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:18, 6 March 2010
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
 | Are you here because I deleted your article? Please read this before you leave me a message. |
| This is Malik Shabazz's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 5 days  |
|
Archives | |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
THTHP Article
The article originally said: 'Wallace referred to "this disturbing story" and used phrases such as "black supremacy", "black racism", and "gospel of hate" to frighten the white audience, and no effort was made to balance the presentation.' This is bias because it attempts to pass off the authors opinion that Wallace used politically incorrect language to 'frighten the white audience' as fact.
I changed it to (something like): 'Wallace referred to "this disturbing story" and used phrases such as "black supremacy", "black racism", and "gospel of hate" which critics claim is politically incorrect.' This is not bias because critics do claim that this is politically incorrect language and it is prefixed with the phrase "critics claim," indicating that it is someones opinion and not fact - unlike your edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Telop (talk • contribs) 01:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for doublechecking. Cheerio. HoundofBaskersville (talk) 03:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Category talk
While cleaning up the category talk namespace I found this edit by you, and I wonder why you didn't delete it—I see no useful content that should be preserved in the history. Ucucha 02:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- You're right. I just deleted it. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 02:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Al-Durrah
Actually Malik I looked at every one of his edits; and I was considering just switching the News organizations and protesters section back to here , the problem was he made that section illegible after that version. I just decided to bring it back to go. Revert me if you think I lost some good valid additions...Modernist (talk) 21:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Is that OK
The user copied my signature to it post. IMO it makes it look as I signed it, I removed it once, but my edit was reverted. Thanks.Could you please respond here. I will check on it myself.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- .. You did sign it, at the time indicated in the timestamp that was copied. Present an alternative that would work for you. Better yet, let it go and get on with your day. Unomi (talk) 05:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I did not post it on that board, but at a user talk page. I do not care about the user quoting me, I just believe the user should not use my signature because it is more than misleading. I presented alternative here It was linked to the post, I only deleted my signature. BTW are you watching my contributions? Ah, who cares, if you are?--Mbz1 (talk) 05:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Mbz1. While that particular edit looks odd, what Vexorg did was copy your entire post from Gilabrand's Talk page, signature and all. I don't see anything wrong with that. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 05:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've never seen somebody did something like that before. It is misleading. It looks like I made the post in the middle of Vexorg post. In my edit