Revision as of 10:43, 28 July 2011 editFakTNeviM (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,319 edits Light Undid revision 441848568 and Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:45, 28 July 2011 edit undoBidgee (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers52,550 edits Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on User talk:Danjel. (TW)Next edit → | ||
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
:Stop harrashing me. You was not invitated to our discussion. I don´t know what you still trying. Stop writing me messages and just leave me alive. I don´t want to react on this inappropriate interference inside othes interview. --] (]) 10:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC) | :Stop harrashing me. You was not invitated to our discussion. I don´t know what you still trying. Stop writing me messages and just leave me alive. I don´t want to react on this inappropriate interference inside othes interview. --] (]) 10:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
== July 2011 == | |||
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]  according to the reverts you have made on ]. Users are expected to ] with others and avoid editing ].<br> | |||
In particular, the ] states that: | |||
# '''Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.''' | |||
# '''Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.''' | |||
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's ] to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents ] among editors. You can post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary ]. If you continue to edit war, you '''may be ] from editing without further notice.'''<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ''Please cease your ] on both Jeffro77 and Danjel user talk page. I've warned you a few days ago along with warning given to you by both Jeffro77 and Danjel. Continuing your behaviour will see you reported on ]. '' ] (]) 10:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:45, 28 July 2011
A cheeseburger for you!
FaktneviM (talk) 15:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC) |
A beer for you!
FaktneviM (talk) 15:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks!
I really appreciate the barnstar you gave me. It was a pleasant surprise and very thoughtful. 72Dino (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion (nomination of WwCSGHa)
Category:Wikipedians with Celtic,Slavic,Germanic,Hebrew ancestors, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 12:37, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for informing me. I replied there and waiting for others consideration. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 20:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi, please see my reply to your comment at my talk page. Best, -- Black Falcon 17:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
--Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
ResolvedThanks!
It was a pleasant surprise to wake up to another barnstar! I'm not sure what it was for (but probably related to my non-breaking-spaces hunt, I expect). Thanks :o) Pesky (talk …stalk!) 10:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Exactly!
- I am also happy you´re glad from the technical barnstar. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 10:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Editing others' comments
Please note that it is generally not appropriate to modify other editors' comments on Talk pages, including striking out what another editor has written. Obvious personal attacks that only attack another edit with no relevant discussion of article content can sometimes be struck out or deleted. However, this does not apply to words or phrases that you simply consider to be uncivil.--Jeffro77 (talk) 16:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- If some editor behave unproperly, should we tolerate that? All, who participated on that, should be ashamed, of course. Motives of BlackCab was simply contempted to at least 2 editors. Another uncivil-like comments from me and B Fizz. However, my own comment was not uncivil, but rather sort of unproper humor. Others rather showed their disrespect to other project members. Very sad you agree with this nasty behavior. I did mistake, when I gave the teamwork, in fact civility-like, barnstar to you. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- Why did you use uncivil undone? this is marked as deleted edit like from vandals. I have right do same way as you did. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- I reverted your change, because you should not have made the change to other editors' text in the first place. It is up to the original editor to retract comments that are merely 'uncivil'. In the context of 'uncivil' comments, it is only if there is an obvious personal attack that is not relevant to discussion that any editor may delete material. The relevant guideline states: "Editing – or even removing – others' comments is sometimes allowed. ... Removing harmful posts, including personal attacks, trolling and vandalism. This generally does not extend to messages that are merely uncivil; deletions of simple invective are controversial." My reversion of your improper editing does not indicate specific endorsement of any other editors' comments. However, there is a high degree of subjectivity in what you deemed to be 'uncivil'.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:27, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Refactorizing
Should I call to admins for refactor those ´weasel words´ a little bit with WP:RTP, WP:CIV, WP:AGF ? I could also refactor it with other ways, because strike off is not only way to do RTP. I carefully read that talk page again and I still think discussion started to deal with environment of wiki-stress due beginning personal attacks, disrespect and vile behavior WP:WQT. especially between project members WP:JW. It was like two-sided war, in which you - Jeffro77 and BlackCab permanently offend others saying all their arguments are irrelevant or using any other of ridiculing tactics. It is not first time I felt it. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest you (a) grow up; (b) get over it; and (c) focus on discussing content of articles rather than dwelling on talk page comments. You have admitted you made certain comments as a "joke", trying to "upset" me and provoke a response. You got it. Now just move on. BlackCab (talk) 23:55, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- Typical response. Could you also say moreover I am irrelevant and absurdity will be perfect. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 00:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Note
If you liked to keep such statements in the ´public article talk´, do as you wish. I will not to protest anymore.
My attitude that those words were inappropriate everyone can read it. If you disagree, I will not continue harass my personal values and mental peace with it.
This could be marked as "end" and my "giving up".
Have a nice day.
Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 10:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
2700+ Chess GM´s
Methods for comparing top chess players throughout history
What is the reason behind your ranking? A rating of X is a rating of X. There is no need in listing shared ranks as unshared (and before you come up with the inflation argument - it doesn't matter as you still rate X higher than X-1...). And Kramnik's top rating was 2809, not 2811. See the ref. Can you show me the games which gave him that two additional points? The 2811 on the FIDE chart is a mistake (see FIDE lists). P.S. In the individual calculations, Kramnik has "no games" in January 2002, so he could have impossible gained two points there http://ratings.fide.com/hist.phtml?event=4101588). --Alexmagnus2 (talk) 18:44, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Alexmagnus2. I known your ref, but it was wrong.
- Kramnik played 4 games and achieve 2811 ELO in January 2002 and maintain in April 2002 with 0 games played. Official FIDE here. I have my own personal MS Excel sheet with internet-automated-updating with macro. There are stats including all published FIDE ratings list since start of using ELO system in 1970´s. Those 79 players over 2700 rating includes some players ´before-ELO´, but was calculated backwards with system of Arpad Elo. (=Don´t worry. Not by me!). Regards. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 19:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Which 4 games? And why are they not in the individual calculations and respective FIDE lists (the additional 2 points appear in the FIDE lists after April 2003 though). I just want to clear up this mystery, once and forever. And what's with shared ratings?--Alexmagnus2 (talk) 20:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Do not bother yourselves about nonsenses. He just played 4 games as you see in my ref. Not 2003, but 2002. FIDE have problem with several their pages. Sometimes they just fault. If is it mystery for you, that some (rather many) big international organizations have mess in their documents, I have rather mystery if some organization do not errors. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Something 1
I have repeatedly requested that you restrict your comments to article content. I have repeatedly indicated sources supporting the material I have posted. If you continue your personal attacks by calling me 'extremist' or by placing false warnings on my Talk page, you will be reported.--Jeffro77 (talk) 13:27, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- If Jeffro77 removes your comments then please respect their wishes (per WP:REMOVED). Continuing to reverting them can be seen as uncivil and risk in being blocked for edit warring/disruption. Bidgee (talk) 15:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- I just found that different rules is applied for Jeffro´s wishes and another level for respect of my wishes. This type of mock encyclopedia and type of mock cooperation is so disguasting and I´ll rather end of my editing on Misplaced Pages at all. This unfair atmosphere is just get tired me. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- An editor removing notices from their own Talk page (permitted, see WP:UP#CMT) is not the same as an editor modifying the text of another editor's comments (generally not permitted, see WP:TPO).--Jeffro77 (talk) 09:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Original editor was asked for that. I want to hear from him what mocked is in this encyclopedia, if editors have NOT responsibility to respect others wish in each one´s personal wishes. Rules, which even allowing ignorance of other wishes. Oh, well. Just mocked community with false people, in general. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 09:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- An editor removing notices from their own Talk page (permitted, see WP:UP#CMT) is not the same as an editor modifying the text of another editor's comments (generally not permitted, see WP:TPO).--Jeffro77 (talk) 09:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- I just found that different rules is applied for Jeffro´s wishes and another level for respect of my wishes. This type of mock encyclopedia and type of mock cooperation is so disguasting and I´ll rather end of my editing on Misplaced Pages at all. This unfair atmosphere is just get tired me. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Something 2
Please stop your disruptive behaviour. Your behaviour is verging on harassment. Misplaced Pages prides itself on providing a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing edits, such as the one several you made to User talk:Jeffro77, potentially compromise that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing. -danjel (talk to me) 02:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- What? --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 07:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Stop talking with such annoyances without invitation. I have no interest to read incomprehensible and reasonless messages like this. What edit is problematic for you? Do you have right to enter inside personal discussion of two editors? Call you someone? If not, please take us continue resolve our issues and do not mock your interest here. Thx. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 07:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian again, as you did at User talk: Jeffro77, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I strongly suggest that you stop talking with User:Jeffro77. If you make one more harassing post, I will report your behaviour to WP:ANI.
Furthermore, do not edit my content, per WP:TALKNO, for example the heading of this section. You are free to remove this section (per WP:OWNTALK), but changing what I write is simply not acceptable. -danjel (talk to me) 10:16, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Stop harrashing me. You was not invitated to our discussion. I don´t know what you still trying. Stop writing me messages and just leave me alive. I don´t want to react on this inappropriate interference inside othes interview. --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 10:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
July 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on User talk:Danjel. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please cease your disruption on both Jeffro77 and Danjel user talk page. I've warned you a few days ago along with warning given to you by both Jeffro77 and Danjel. Continuing your behaviour will see you reported on WP:ANI. Bidgee (talk) 10:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)