| Revision as of 00:42, 23 April 2014 editClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,386,394 editsm Archiving 2 discussions to User talk:NE Ent/Archive/2014. (BOT)← Previous edit |
Revision as of 18:07, 24 April 2014 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,386,394 editsm Archiving 3 discussions to User talk:NE Ent/Archive/2014. (BOT)Next edit → |
| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
|
] |
|
] |
|
{{collapsebottom}} |
|
{{collapsebottom}} |
|
|
|
|
== AN/I should not be closed for that reason == |
|
|
|
|
|
Request that you reopen ] |
|
|
|
|
|
Issue is not just about use of unreliable sources. Please read the thread and investigate the issue. POV pushing, over several months is the main issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
Also suggest that someone runs checkuser on some of those commentators. ] 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Your closing comment appears to be directed generally at all participants in the conversation, which suggests I have been edit warring. I have not. I do not think you looked into this at all. ] 22:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
{{hat|Comments from DangerousPanda, Lesion, CFCF, RexxS which don't appear to actually addressed to {{u|NE Ent}} <small>]</small> 13:57, 20 April 2014 (UTC) }} |
|
|
:: Seems like a fine close. Content Disputes belong at DRN. Checkusers belong on SPI. POV pushing belongs with ]. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span> 22:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::So I have to make separate threads on several pages? That seems unproductive. ] 22:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Fuck this, forget it I have better things to do. Keep your POV article, enjoy |
|
|
:::: Oooh, "I'm going to go sulk in the corner because I don't understand the right places to do things and now I'm mad?" <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span> 22:37, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Well, as amused as you may be, the encyclopedia suffers. Most people here don't care about that. They are here to argue, bully and shout their opinions. ] 22:50, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: I care very much about the encyclopedia. But you don't go to Sears to get a colonoscopy. They could probably do it, but it would be painful. And end up in their fall catalogue. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span> 23:24, 19 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::{{U|Lesion}}, I know its hard, but you know you have all of ] behind you. The troll only wants feeding and frankly this entire case is completely ridiculous. Ignore him. ] (] · ] · ]) 09:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::: |
|
|
:::::::: ] is talking out of his arse here, just to get a rise out of you. Anyone who genuinely believes that a user's conduct is so ] that a topic ban is the only solution is perfectly entitled to raise the issue at the Administrator's Noticeboard. You may indeed be asked to justify why it's so urgent that a ] has not been tried already, but we all know that RfC/U is easy to ignore, takes time, and often to devolves into a slinging match. Any decent admin would be trying to help you resolve the issues, not heaping sarcasm on you. You know that everyone at WPMED values your contributions and it's not worth losing those over some malfunctioning processes. Take a day or two off if you fancy a break, and leave the e-cigs for someone else to clean up. Dealing with SPAs is a thankless job and burns you out if you allow yourself to become too invested in it. Nil carborundum, --] (]) 13:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
{{hab}} |
|
|
::You (both) were edit warring. From ]: ''An edit war only arises if the situation develops into a series of back-and-forth reverts. ... '''any''' edit warring may lead to sanctions, there is a bright-line rule called the three-revert rule (3RR), ...'' (emphasis mine). I understand not wanting to repeat what you've posted on ANI on a different board -- I suggest simply linking to the existing discussion if you choose to raise the question discussion elsewhere. <small>]</small> 14:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] opened == |
|
|
|
|
|
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by May 4, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, ]] 15:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Rich Farmbrough case clarified The arbitration clarification request, either involving you, or in which you participated (Rich Farmbrough) has resulted in a clarification motion by the Arbitration Committee The Clarification can be found at [[Misplaced Pages: == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The arbitration clarification request, either involving you, or in which you participated (Rich Farmbrough) has resulted in a clarification motion by the Arbitration Committee |
|
|
|
|
|
The Clarification can be found at ] and the complete discussion can be found at ] For the Arbitration Committee,--]] 16:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC) |
|
