| Revision as of 22:24, 1 November 2007 editNonexistant User (talk | contribs)9,925 edits 3rr warning | Latest revision as of 07:44, 7 January 2010 edit undoBaronLarf (talk | contribs)Administrators18,547 edits Notice: Incorrect use of minor edits check box. (TW) | ||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]  according to the reverts you have made on ]. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, you may be ] from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. <!-- {{3rr|Spiro Agnew}} -->--] 22:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| {{3rr|Spiro Agnew}} | |||
| I have only just seen this. Shameless hypocrisy from Strothra - who may have been the anonymous editor who blanked the page in February. Strothra opened up an edit war and then sent a pre-emptive 3rr warning. Anyway, he/she does not appear to exist on Misplaced Pages any more. No tears from me. ] (]) 22:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Sytten == | |||
| Hi, Pdawson3. I noticed you added a comment by a reviewer to the ] article. It will need to have the reviewer's name as well as a cited source. It would be great if you could add that. Cheers <span style="font-family: tahoma;"> — ] ]</span> 18:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks, CactusWriter. You're obviously right, but it was more than 40 years ago and I have no access to the source these days. I just remember it as a witty comment. If lack of source leads to the comment's deletion, I shall quite understand. ] (]) 09:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Okay. I didn't realize you were quoting from memory. It's a shame because it could be a good comment to include. Was there a particular newspaper you read back then? If so, there could be a possibility of doing an archive search. Just a thought. Otherwise, yes, I'm afraid that a quote like that can't remain without sourcing. <span style="font-family: tahoma;"> — ] ]</span> 20:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Alas, I was an avid film buff in those days and I read reviews from wherever I could find them. A friend just pointed out that the joke is (i) obvious and (ii) matches a earlier joke in ], where Max (Agent 86) is discussing Agent 43 with Agent 99, who says "you're worth two 43s, 86.". I'll remove the comment myself.] (]) 11:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == January 2010 == | |||
| ] Please remember to mark your edits{{#if:|, such as your recent edits to ],}} as "minor" if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits. Per ], a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. The rule of thumb is that only vandalism/test reversions or edits consisting solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modifying content should be flagged as "minor". Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-minor --> ]] 07:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 07:44, 7 January 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Spiro Agnew. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. --Strothra 22:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I have only just seen this. Shameless hypocrisy from Strothra - who may have been the anonymous editor who blanked the page in February. Strothra opened up an edit war and then sent a pre-emptive 3rr warning. Anyway, he/she does not appear to exist on Misplaced Pages any more. No tears from me. PDAWSON3 (talk) 22:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Sytten
Hi, Pdawson3. I noticed you added a comment by a reviewer to the Sytten article. It will need to have the reviewer's name as well as a cited source. It would be great if you could add that. Cheers — CactusWriter | 18:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, CactusWriter. You're obviously right, but it was more than 40 years ago and I have no access to the source these days. I just remember it as a witty comment. If lack of source leads to the comment's deletion, I shall quite understand. PDAWSON3 (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Okay. I didn't realize you were quoting from memory. It's a shame because it could be a good comment to include. Was there a particular newspaper you read back then? If so, there could be a possibility of doing an archive search. Just a thought. Otherwise, yes, I'm afraid that a quote like that can't remain without sourcing. — CactusWriter | 20:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Alas, I was an avid film buff in those days and I read reviews from wherever I could find them. A friend just pointed out that the joke is (i) obvious and (ii) matches a earlier joke in Get Smart, where Max (Agent 86) is discussing Agent 43 with Agent 99, who says "you're worth two 43s, 86.". I'll remove the comment myself.PDAWSON3 (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
January 2010
Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits. Per Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. The rule of thumb is that only vandalism/test reversions or edits consisting solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modifying content should be flagged as "minor". Thank you. BaronLarf 07:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)