User talk:Momma's Little Helper: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:32, 17 May 2010

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alteration of your user page

Momma's Little Helper, I must apologize for my undoing of your edit. I have already expressed that on the Talk:VDM Publishing House page.

Also, you should take a look at your own User Page. (If you are unfamiliar with your user page, you can get to it by clicking on the link at the very top of the page with your name. Or you can just click here: User:Momma's Little Helper. As you can see, your user page contains a giant VDM logo on it. If you go to your user page and click on the history tab, you will see that this logo has been added to your page by User:Playmobilonhishorse. You probably will want to fix this.

I am not a wikilawyer, but in my opinion it is at least extremely rude for someone to vandalize your user page in this manner. I am not sure that it violates the WP:userpage policies, but it probably does. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 03:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Previous account?

Hi there. I was just looking at your contribs and noticed that you have posted comments like this one that indicate deep familiarity with Wikipedia. Have you edited here previously using another account? Tiamut^talk 18:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Momma's Little Helper. You have new messages at Hohum's talk page.
Message added 00:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

(Hohum ^@) 00:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Momma's Little Helper. You have new messages at Hohum's talk page.
Message added 14:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

(Hohum ^@) 14:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Lever. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 15:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the edit summary. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 15:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interview of Dr. Wolfgang Philipp Müller

Thanks for having woken up the VDM Publishing page and its discussion. There is no doubt that your iterative attempts to remove the interview of Dr. Wolfgang P. Müller from the reference section of this article will paradoxically contribute to keep this document alive.

Here is a testimony to the good health of this interview: http://ohyamazaki.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2010/02/post-f00f.html. Playmobilonhishorse (talk) 00:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what your problem is. I have no interest in the interview - I explained why I think a paraphrase of the interview's content is preferable to a lengthy quote from the primary source, per policy. If you have policy-based counter arguments, make them at the article's talk page. Momma's Little Helper (talk) 01:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. I was mainly intrigued by the motivation you have to remove the link to the archived pdf file of this interview: http://www.webcitation.org/5ngO4Y290. The issue of the choice between paraphrase and quote was secondary. Playmobilonhishorse (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mountains in the Golan Heights

Hi. Thank you for your message. The draft article wasn't on my watch list and I wasn't aware of the discussion on the Talk page. I'll hold off moving anything until there's something resembling consensus. Thanks again. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Revert

I'm aware, which is why I've stopped trying. Though I don't see the people constantly reverting my edits catching hell, despite their edits being simply illogical. Oh well. I intend to take it to the discussion page as soon as I have time, hopefully you as well as the other editors will participate in the discussions so we can come to some sort of solution. Thanks, ElUmmah (talk) 02:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3RR note

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at George Galloway. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

You are edit warring over a single word and you have made no single attempt at discussion. Off2riorob (talk) 23:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That word is inappropriate for use in WP neutral voice, as I've explained in both my edit summary, and on the Talk page. Please continue the discussion there. Momma's Little Helper (talk)

I was not trying to be talking in no neutral voice, you were edit warring without any discussion, edit summaries is not explanation or discussion. I was comment here as a warning to you that I was about to report you if you continued. So as far as your assume good faith reply goes, you were edit warring without any discussion and if you continue I will report you.Off2riorob (talk) 11:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

edit summaries are most clearly an explanation, especially when prefaced by the word : "explanation". I have also explained my rationale on the Talk page. Please continue the discussion there. Momma's Little Helper (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:RolandR. If a user makes more than one revert, then there is the possibility of an edit war. However, it is not considered warring if the user reverts only once. Thank you. mechamind 9 0 06:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was presumed since you did not sign your post on RolandR's talk page. Be equally careful next time. mechamind 9 0 17:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What was presumed? You presumed he only made one revert, because I did not sign my post? Are you for real? Momma's Little Helper (talk) 21:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only because your message could have easily been mistaken for vandalism. mechamind90 22:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- To balance it a little, though, I did remind RolandR about ownership of articles as possible intimidation. mechamind90 22:55, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - My message was a standard notice for edit warring, which RR was clearly engaged in. That you missed the number of reverts doesn't change the fact, nor does it make my message "vandalism". Just take more care in the future, that's all. Momma's Little Helper (talk) 02:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:25, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Defamatory content

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please note that if you continue I will take this to arbitration enforcement to request that you be banned. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 76: / Line 76: @@
 Please note that if you continue I ''will'' take this to arbitration enforcement to request that you be banned. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO|talk]]) 23:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
-==Notification of arbitration sanctions==
-As a result of [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles|an arbitration case]], the [[WP:AC|Arbitration Committee]] has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Area of conflict|Palestinian-Israeli conflict]], broadly understood.  As a result, the Committee has enacted broad [[Wikipedia:General sanctions|editing restrictions]], described [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Discretionary sanctions|here]] and below.
-*Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
-*The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
-*Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
-*Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently [[WP:AE]]), or the Committee.
-These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case.  This message is to so inform you.  This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
-Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted).  Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
-This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles#Log_of_notifications|here]]. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] ([[User talk:ChrisO|talk]]) 23:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)