| Revision as of 02:15, 4 December 2008 editCaspian blue (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers35,434 editsm →Wrong warning and huggle← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:14, 4 December 2008 edit undoMustafa Kemal Atatürk (talk | contribs)61 edits →Wrong warning and huggleNext edit → | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| *To Lazylaces, there were edit warring right after the above newbie inserted "original research materials" to the article. Another editor, named Kubie deleted them for the reason, and Mustafa kept putting back. And you falsely gave Kubie a warning for vandalism. If you don't understand contents, do not falsely accuse editors with wrong warnings. Regards.--] 02:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | *To Lazylaces, there were edit warring right after the above newbie inserted "original research materials" to the article. Another editor, named Kubie deleted them for the reason, and Mustafa kept putting back. And you falsely gave Kubie a warning for vandalism. If you don't understand contents, do not falsely accuse editors with wrong warnings. Regards.--] 02:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :Caspian blue is lying. i reworked my edit but kuebie reverted it again for no reason. Caspian blue then acted as a meatpuppet for kuebie, deliberately reverting my edit once so kuebie could revert me again, and appear to have the same amount of reverts as me.] (]) 03:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:14, 4 December 2008
| This is Lazylaces's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 days  |
AfD warning
Prod warning
Thank you (userpage)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism from my user page! We should block that IP (I'm not an admin though). Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 22:04, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello Lazylaces, thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage (I thought it better to post this under the heading in place, due to it being the same subject, rather than make a new one) Thanks again, ] (] · ])☺ 08:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I do not know them personally, and I do not think I have dealt with them before. So nothing springs to mind, but going on that they blanked it once, then replaced it with something like "have you got a fetish for the police", its probably the case that they just have a personal hatred for the police, which I can easily believe considering the vandalism seen on a day-to-day basis on the articles police and police officer. ] (] · ])☺ 14:26, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
São Paulo
The picture of the Pinheiros River and Bridge Otávio Farias shows a section of the city, instead of showing some urban fabric or image characteristics of Sao Paulo. The assembly, which is in the Brazilian article of Sao Paulo, summarizes the city in a few photos.
I didn't vandalism. Excuse me if I was aggressive. And sorry me by bad English! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.162.232.151 (talk) 20:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
WQA
Hi, you have started filing a WP:WQA report, but it is not complete, and does not discuss the issue at all. Please return and complete the report as per directions at the top of the WQA page. ►BMW◄ 22:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
ucla
why do you keep deleting my changes to the establishment of ucla? i have researched the topic at great length and it seems pretty clear that 1881, is the correct date, given that the state normal school was changed to the southern branch of the UC. please compare this history of Ariz State, SDSU, SJSU, SFSU and chico state, and you will see they are all former normal schools and trace their establishment to the creation of the normal school. same thing should be true with ucla. also, take a look at the history of the outlook, the forerunner of the daily bruin; and the history of the ucla's graduate school of education - both trace their roots to the los angeles state normal school
regards,anderskw Anderskw (talk) 00:22, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Wrong warning and huggle
Thank you for fighting against vandalism, but before reverting articles, would you check its history first? You gave a wrong warning to a wrong user.--Caspian blue 02:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- caspian blue is wrong, i stripped my addition to the article of original research and redid the whole thing to not copy directly from the source.Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (talk) 02:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- So, you're admitting you deliberately put the "original research".--Caspian blue 02:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- To Lazylaces, there were edit warring right after the above newbie inserted "original research materials" to the article. Another editor, named Kubie deleted them for the reason, and Mustafa kept putting back. And you falsely gave Kubie a warning for vandalism. If you don't understand contents, do not falsely accuse editors with wrong warnings. Regards.--Caspian blue 02:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- Caspian blue is lying. i reworked my edit but kuebie reverted it again for no reason. Caspian blue then acted as a meatpuppet for kuebie, deliberately reverting my edit once so kuebie could revert me again, and appear to have the same amount of reverts as me.Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (talk) 03:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)