| Revision as of 00:12, 6 August 2009 editLil-unique1 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers59,528 editsm →August 2009 - Edit War Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:19, 6 August 2009 edit undoPokerdance (talk | contribs)2,545 edits →August 2009 - Edit War Reply: Reply to commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| Excuse me i apologise if this sounds round, but i think you need to look at what an edit war is. a ] is defined as two users who are constantly reverting each others edits. On the ] page i have NOT engaged in an edit war because reverting incorrect edits by another user (yes there were 4 that i was aware of) does not constitute an edit war. if the IP user had reverted them back then yes you would be correct in giving me a warning. Frankly i feel insulted by you leaving me such messages on my discussion page and i dont think it is fair seen that it gives the impression that i am unware of wikipedia rules, that i cannot edit properly and that my editing behaviour is near unacceptable. I would request in the future that you check yourself that you fully understand editing protocol before making such claims. i feel that your motive for doing so my not have been ] but more to do with the fact that we clashed previously on this article regarding an issue with the way singles are listed in the infobox. (] (]) 00:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)) | Excuse me i apologise if this sounds round, but i think you need to look at what an edit war is. a ] is defined as two users who are constantly reverting each others edits. On the ] page i have NOT engaged in an edit war because reverting incorrect edits by another user (yes there were 4 that i was aware of) does not constitute an edit war. if the IP user had reverted them back then yes you would be correct in giving me a warning. Frankly i feel insulted by you leaving me such messages on my discussion page and i dont think it is fair seen that it gives the impression that i am unware of wikipedia rules, that i cannot edit properly and that my editing behaviour is near unacceptable. I would request in the future that you check yourself that you fully understand editing protocol before making such claims. i feel that your motive for doing so my not have been ] but more to do with the fact that we clashed previously on this article regarding an issue with the way singles are listed in the infobox. (] (]) 00:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)) | ||
| :I know fully well what an edit war is, I have been involved in many, please do not try to educate me. Making four revisions in 24 hours or less is a violation of the ], and while there ''are'' some exceptions to the rule, but being right is not one of them. I know this firsthand, as I was recently blocked for the same mistake you are currently making. I'm not trying to be uncivil or assume bad faith, and I'm not holding any grudges. I just want to warn you about your breach of policy, before you wind up getting a block like I did the other day. <font face="Trebuchet MS, Century Gothic, Verdana">]</font> <sup>]</sup>/<small>]</small> 00:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:19, 6 August 2009
| This is Pokerdance's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1 |
From now on, I will be replying to messages where they were started. If you're expecting a reply, watch this page. Let me know if you'd prefer me to respond somewhere else besides here.
Pokerdance's Archives
August 2009 - Edit War Reply
Excuse me i apologise if this sounds round, but i think you need to look at what an edit war is. a WP:edit war is defined as two users who are constantly reverting each others edits. On the Exposed (Kristinia DeBarge album) page i have NOT engaged in an edit war because reverting incorrect edits by another user (yes there were 4 that i was aware of) does not constitute an edit war. if the IP user had reverted them back then yes you would be correct in giving me a warning. Frankly i feel insulted by you leaving me such messages on my discussion page and i dont think it is fair seen that it gives the impression that i am unware of wikipedia rules, that i cannot edit properly and that my editing behaviour is near unacceptable. I would request in the future that you check yourself that you fully understand editing protocol before making such claims. i feel that your motive for doing so my not have been WP:good faith but more to do with the fact that we clashed previously on this article regarding an issue with the way singles are listed in the infobox. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC))
- I know fully well what an edit war is, I have been involved in many, please do not try to educate me. Making four revisions in 24 hours or less is a violation of the WP:3RR, and while there are some exceptions to the rule, but being right is not one of them. I know this firsthand, as I was recently blocked for the same mistake you are currently making. I'm not trying to be uncivil or assume bad faith, and I'm not holding any grudges. I just want to warn you about your breach of policy, before you wind up getting a block like I did the other day. POKERdance /contribs 00:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)