| Revision as of 16:07, 11 August 2014 edit157.203.242.36 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:48, 11 August 2014 edit undoC.Fred (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators277,913 edits →August 2014: 3RR applies to your reverts but not other user's, since he's reverting talk-page vandalismNext edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| All editors are expected to abide by these guidelines to ensure that talk page discussion is civil and easy to follow. Editors who refuse to follow the guidelines and indicate a willingness to continue to disrupt discussions will have their editing privileges revoked. —''']''' (]) 15:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC) | All editors are expected to abide by these guidelines to ensure that talk page discussion is civil and easy to follow. Editors who refuse to follow the guidelines and indicate a willingness to continue to disrupt discussions will have their editing privileges revoked. —''']''' (]) 15:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
| The Talk page is easy to follow. However, BetaFive continues to publish a 'Summary' Conclusion which only lists their arguments as having been accepted as the consensus. If BetaFive wishes to publish a Summary of the Events then all users should be allowed to edit that Summary. | :The Talk page is easy to follow. However, BetaFive continues to publish a 'Summary' Conclusion which only lists their arguments as having been accepted as the consensus. If BetaFive wishes to publish a Summary of the Events then all users should be allowed to edit that Summary. | ||
| I am not editing his talk comments; I am editing the Conclusion of the debate which he continues to misrepresent as his own. Either he edits the conclusion to reflect all parties or I will do it for him. | :I am not editing his talk comments; I am editing the Conclusion of the debate which he continues to misrepresent as his own. Either he edits the conclusion to reflect all parties or I will do it for him. | ||
| ] (]) 16:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC) | :] (]) 16:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::The conclusion is, effectively a comment by him. I've asked him to present the material differently so that you can put your counterpoint ''below'' his rather than overwriting it. | |||
| ::I should also note that, since the conclusion is a comment by him, reverting your changes is an exception to ], since he's returning the edited comment to the status quo (editing another user's comments is vandalism); your reverts, to change the comment, are not an exception. —''']''' (]) 16:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:48, 11 August 2014
Welcome to Misplaced Pages!
Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Contributing to Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Intuitive guide to Misplaced Pages
You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but you may want to consider creating an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (157.203.242.36) is used to identify you instead.
In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 15:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
August 2014
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Hacker News, you may be blocked from editing.
If you want to reply to a comment made by a user, do it after that user's comment. Do not change the user's comment or hijack it as your own (replacing their signature with yours)
All editors are expected to abide by these guidelines to ensure that talk page discussion is civil and easy to follow. Editors who refuse to follow the guidelines and indicate a willingness to continue to disrupt discussions will have their editing privileges revoked. —C.Fred (talk) 15:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
- The Talk page is easy to follow. However, BetaFive continues to publish a 'Summary' Conclusion which only lists their arguments as having been accepted as the consensus. If BetaFive wishes to publish a Summary of the Events then all users should be allowed to edit that Summary.
- I am not editing his talk comments; I am editing the Conclusion of the debate which he continues to misrepresent as his own. Either he edits the conclusion to reflect all parties or I will do it for him.
- The conclusion is, effectively a comment by him. I've asked him to present the material differently so that you can put your counterpoint below his rather than overwriting it.
- I should also note that, since the conclusion is a comment by him, reverting your changes is an exception to WP:3RR, since he's returning the edited comment to the status quo (editing another user's comments is vandalism); your reverts, to change the comment, are not an exception. —C.Fred (talk) 16:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC)