| Revision as of 03:43, 31 July 2010 editLar (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators29,172 edits →Deadly Serious???: new section← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 21:28, 6 May 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,379,432 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Hipocrite/05/2024. (BOT)Tag: Manual revert | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div style="background-color: #BBDDFF; border: #4169E1 1px solid; margin: 2em 0 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: middle;"> | <div style="background-color: #BBDDFF; border: #4169E1 1px solid; margin: 2em 0 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: middle;"> | ||
| ]Hello, {{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}|1}}. Your no-talkback edit notice is constantly ignored.{{facepalm}}<br /> | ]Hello, {{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}|1}}. Your no-talkback edit notice is constantly ignored.{{facepalm}}<br /> | ||
| {{No talkback}} | |||
| I do check my Misplaced Pages-related email, to those who ask. I don't typically do what emailers want. | |||
| <span class="plainlinks" style="font-size: 88%; font-weight: normal;"> You will every time by removing the {{tl|Talkback}} or {{tl|Tb}} template. They will never stop. </span></div> | <span class="plainlinks" style="font-size: 88%; font-weight: normal;"> You will every time by removing the {{tl|Talkback}} or {{tl|Tb}} template. They will never stop. </span></div> | ||
| {{Archive box|image=] | {{Archive box|image=]|auto=no | ||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | ||
| |archiveprefix=User talk:Hipocrite/ | |archiveprefix=User talk:Hipocrite/ | ||
| |format=m/Y | |format=m/Y | ||
| |age= |
|age=72 | ||
| |index=yes | |index=yes | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == good move == | |||
| I didn't have the bollocks to move Lar's edit myself. Good thinking. ] (]) 12:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == hat/hab etc == | |||
| Hello - I noticed you changed my use of {{tlx|discussion top}} to {{tlx|hat}} etc. That's absolutely fine - I was going to use hat/hab per clear earlier procedure but I saw a hidden comment saying when discussion top/bottom should be used and so used that instead. If it's always to be hat/hab perhaps the hidden comment should also be removed? ] (]) 16:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| : It should. I will. ] (]) 16:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :: I moved the hat/hab comment first and made a note that it's almost always preferred to use it instead of discussion top... if discussion top should be removed entirely? dunno. Not clear to me one way or the other. ++]: ]/] 17:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Concerned == | |||
| All I was doing was stating that it has been criticised at RealClimate. That is a fact, backed up with a reference. It is a very popular blog, considered important enough to have a wikipedia page. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Censored! == | |||
| :AARRGGGH. Yet, why has Snotty Wong not been censored for calling members of the Article Rescue Squadron "lazy" and continuing to imply that they undermine the project by using the rescue tag for improper purposes. My outburst was inappropriate but much less insidious.--''']''' • <small><sup style="position:relative">]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">]</span></sup></small> 21:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| : "Lazy" is not as blatent as "douchebag." Be the bigger man. ] (]) 21:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::I fully support your removal. Lazy, especially in the way it was used, is not uncivil. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] <small>]</small></span> 21:42, 22 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Duchamp apparently has messy hair... == | |||
| Bring the issue up at ANI. At this point, some level of banning discussion is necessary. If you start the discussion, I will chime there... --]''''']''''' 03:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Pov tag on "Climate Research Unit email controversy"== | |||
| You placed the tag on 7/16, and there is currently a discussion underway as to whether it is still warranted. If you feel it is, can you please explain the problem, and if not, can you remove? Thanks. ] (]) 14:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Probably (hopefully) out enjoying his weekend. I'd give him till 7/27 or so, it is vacation season after all. That reminds me, why the hell am I not on vacation!? ] (]) 18:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Derek Smart Surrogate == | |||
| Hipocrite, I don't know who I can go to. Since I no longer have an account that I can edit articles or talk page articles. An editor that is apparently another Derek Smart surrogate has edited a BLP, ] with what I consider problematic edits. Mr. Smart is currently involved in a civil suit with Mr. Allen. The David Allen article appears to me to contain multiple violations of policy violations. Derek Smart surrogates have been problematic in the past, something near a half dozen accounts banned. I suggest that semi-protecting the David Allen article may be considered. I would really appreciate attention to this matter. Thank you, ] (]) 03:40, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Bill, I thought you had promised ArbCom that you would stay away from Derek Smart in Misplaced Pages because of your ongoing off-wiki feud with him. ] (]) 04:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::I am asking for help on the David Allen article. BTW, on SirFozzie's talk page you have another opportunity to explain why you told ArbCom that brazen total lie about me. ] (]) 04:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hipocrite, in case you aren't aware of it, Mr. Huffman runs a website dedicated to criticizing Derek Smart. ] (]) 04:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Cla68, you made this inaccurate statement before. The more accurate description, I believe is that the website is dedicated to documenting the Derek Smart flame war follies. In particular, those activities primarily focused on the Usenet portion of the Derek Smart flame war follies. ] (]) 05:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| Hipocrite, I apologize for bringing this additional distraction to your doorstep. In case the miscommunication here is mine, the issue that I'm asking for assistance on is the ] article. I would appreciate it if you could take a look. An editor, Wildcard999, has edited this article and may be an editor that has been banned multiple times for disruptive editing. I notice that Orlady has very recently looked at the article. Thank you, ] (]) 05:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| Once bitten, twice shy. I don't edit bios related to possibly litigious persons. ] (]) 14:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| : Thanks for the chuckle :-) ] (]) 14:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Monckton== | |||
| Who's the aggrieved party you mentioned on SirFozzie's talk page? You don't mean SlimVirgin, do you? -- ] (]) 22:14, 27 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == lol == | |||
| Is it just me or do you share a sneaking suspicion that, lately, common logic is having to be spoon-fed to those who aren't much in the area of critical thinking? ] (]) 18:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Policy based reasons for not using Climategate == | |||
| Hi, just wondering if you've considered my 23:29, 29 July 2010 response to your 21:22, 29 July 2010 post at ]. Do we agree? Regards, --] (]) 01:11, 30 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| : Following people who have announced a desire to no longer deal with your vexatiousness to their talk page is highly problematic. Stop it. ] (]) 02:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::I'm sorry--I missed or forgot your announcement. --] (]) 02:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Deadly Serious??? == | |||
| Probably too strident. Try dialing back a little, please. Thanks. ++]: ]/] 03:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 21:28, 6 May 2024
FacepalmThis user has opted out of talkbacks
I do check my Misplaced Pages-related email, to those who ask. I don't typically do what emailers want.
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |