| Revision as of 22:36, 23 July 2009 editDomer48 (talk | contribs)16,098 edits →LOL: com← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:10, 28 July 2009 edit undoTóraí (talk | contribs)Administrators18,520 edits →Reverting copy edits on Laudabiliter: restored edits, and put up templateNext edit → | ||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
| ::: Shit I am psychic or else it was a very good description. <span style="border:1px solid green;padding:0px;">]</span> 22:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | ::: Shit I am psychic or else it was a very good description. <span style="border:1px solid green;padding:0px;">]</span> 22:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Just had a coughing fit reading that, with my tea now coming out my nose. So intimidated by a ravenous goldfish, and on Opra’s watch list, be afraid, be very afraid. --<font face="Celtic">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 22:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | Just had a coughing fit reading that, with my tea now coming out my nose. So intimidated by a ravenous goldfish, and on Opra’s watch list, be afraid, be very afraid. --<font face="Celtic">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 22:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == Reverting copy edits on Laudabiliter == | |||
| Domer48, please don't revert copy edits. I spent half an hour wikifying an article only to find you have reverted each one of my edits without explanation. | |||
| Also, the template <nowiki>{{huh}}</nowiki> means that a sentence is incomprehensible. It's obviously sourced - and you are doing a great job on that article - but nouns, verbs and adjectives still need to arranged in a comprehendible order. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid <small>(])</small> 23:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I've added the <nowiki>{{Under construction}}</nowiki> template to that page for you and restored my copy edits for earlier. Night. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid <small>(])</small> 23:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:10, 28 July 2009
- Pádraig, Rest In Peace a chara - sorely missed - not to be forgotten.
-- Trolls will be removed with Extreme prejudice!
|
 Archives |
|---|
Useful links
Irish Manual of Style~
Policy ~
Assume good faith ~
Citing sources ~
Warning templates ~
Sources of articles ~
Civility ~
Consensus ~
Dispute resolution ~
Etiquette ~
No original research ~
What Misplaced Pages is not ~
No personal attacks ~
Neutral point of view ~
POINT ~
Reliable sources ~
Verifiability ~
WP:Attribution ~
WP:Synthesis ~
WP:Avoid peacock terms ~ Misplaced Pages:Avoid weasel terms
Useful Noticeboard
3RR~ WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard ~ Third opinion Noticeboard ~ Misplaced Pages:No original research/noticeboard ~
My inappropriate post.
After posing this question on Bastuns talk page: "I saw your post on the Ireland Collaboration page. In particular, "Arbcom have specifically stated that Domer's prevarications can be ignored". I presume Arbcom are the top dogs here on wikipedia? I hate to be nosey, but I'm wondering why they would say that. Some kind of bust up?" I realise it was extremely ignorant of me to ask Bastun and not you. Whether you answer or not, I apologise for my unthinking action. Coll Mac (talk) 12:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- On Bastuns attempt at distraction “Arbcom have specifically stated that Domer's prevarications can be ignored.” As can be seen here it’s a completely spurious claim! Here is a list of ArbCom Members and they said nothing about me or the report that was thrown out by Admin's. Just another reason for fact checking. --Domer48'fenian' 19:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Domer48. It's another wet day where I am, so I reckon that's three or four since I arrived at wikipedia. I'm genuinely sorry you think I wasn't much help at the discussion page (trying to push the ballot too early). I actually thought I was being constructive in my comments, but of course, I may be have been kidding myself on. I agreed with much of what you said, in particular the use of sources. When told that there was no policy making it mandatory, I decided not to pursue the argument. I did enjoy taking part in the debate but I think I'll stick to creating my little articles (nothing controversial there). All the best. Coll Mac (talk) 11:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
LOL
...savaged by a baby goldfish... you have to laugh. BigDunc 21:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- What do you think of them trying to act all menacing? LOL. The talk page stalker appears to have no arguments to go too, thinks wiki is a social networking cite. Probably try turn that talk page into another chat room as well.--Domer48'fenian' 22:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Without looking at link if I am wrong I will leave wiki for good but I know who it is, so I will either be back in a sec to say goodbye or say I knew it, hang on. BigDunc 22:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Shit I am psychic or else it was a very good description. BigDunc 22:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Without looking at link if I am wrong I will leave wiki for good but I know who it is, so I will either be back in a sec to say goodbye or say I knew it, hang on. BigDunc 22:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Just had a coughing fit reading that, with my tea now coming out my nose. So intimidated by a ravenous goldfish, and on Opra’s watch list, be afraid, be very afraid. --Domer48'fenian' 22:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Reverting copy edits on Laudabiliter
Domer48, please don't revert copy edits. I spent half an hour wikifying an article only to find you have reverted each one of my edits without explanation.
Also, the template {{huh}} means that a sentence is incomprehensible. It's obviously sourced - and you are doing a great job on that article - but nouns, verbs and adjectives still need to arranged in a comprehendible order. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 23:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've added the {{Under construction}} template to that page for you and restored my copy edits for earlier. Night. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 23:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)