User talk:Ratel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: We, Wikipedians, dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page–my talk page–as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

...so wyd as die Heer se genade
...so wyd as die Heer se genade

Contents

[edit] About debating with Andyvphil

At this point, Bill Moyers is protected for a few days at least. I highly recommend you stop debating with Andyvphil. He's probably already done enough to get himself blocked, and I think that unless you have time to burn, there would be more useful things to do. I saw the diffs he gave. Both diffs pointed to the same edit, the admin responding to your RFPP. I agree with what you wrote there, but even if I did not, you expressed opinions and I see utterly no reason to suppose that you were lying, as he charged. Being wrong is not lying. But Andyvphil's actions, on the face of it, do match the description you gave. His defense of his prior blocks seems to think that anything short of 3RR is okay, perhaps he should be further warned about that. Reverting the same material back in once or twice a day is still edit warring. 3RR is just a bright line, you'd better have a damn good reason (I've only done it with sock puppets, and even then I'd not be surprised to be blocked first, questions asked later.) --Abd (talk) 05:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Point taken, time to call it off with him. In any case, consensus seems pretty clear (3 vs 1) on the issues. ► RATEL ◄ 05:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
After heading over from his page, I was going to say something not quite along these lines. Please read WP:TEMPLAR and take to heart. Throwing a warning template on a long term user's page is usually interpreted (correctly) as antagonistic and a response out of anger. The Evil Spartan (talk) 05:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Ratel, you took out some of Andyvphil's comments with what looks, at first sight, as inadequate justification. Be careful. Edit warring on a Talk page can get you blocked quickly. If he misrepresented what you said, say so. Don't remove it from the page without very, very good reason.--Abd (talk) 17:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
This is the third time he has removed or munged my comments on the Talk page. I'm fed up with it. I simply reverted because I think it really amounts to little more than complex vandalism. ► RATEL ◄ 23:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation: John Howard

Hello. A request for mediation has been lodged for the John Howard article, concerning whether information about an incident between John Howard and Barack Obama should be included or deleted from the article. The link for the RfM is Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/John_Howard. The issue is still being discussed on the article talk page. Please go to the RfM page and list whether you agree or disagree to be involved in mediation of this issue. Thank you, Lester 01:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prostate

(Reverted 4 edits by XfreddytanX; This is spam-laden rubbish that duplicates material on other pages as a cover for spam links.) Good Call - well spotted. Jmunroo (talk) 21:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/John Howard.
For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 16:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] Matt Drudge

You offered no explanation or argument for undoing my work on the Matt Drudge article I very carefully updated. I'm a working journalist who has long followed the influence of Drudge's website and my data was offered with an unbiased, cool-headed view towards helping Wikipedia's broad readership grasp the historic evolution of The Drudge Report. Wbroun (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

We do not document breaking news or minutiae of people's lives, like what sort of coverage Drudge is giving to the election. I advise you to have a look at the tenets of WP more carefully. ► RATEL ◄ 23:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)