| Revision as of 08:59, 12 April 2015 editLugnuts (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers1,509,055 edits →Buzzards watch me sock: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:12, 12 April 2015 edit undoOccultZone (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers224,089 edits →Buzzards watch me sockNext edit → | ||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
| ]. | ]. | ||
| :I am seeing that the amount of those SPIs are on increase nowadays where you find lack of any policy based results. Clerks usually turn the sock puppetry case into meat puppetry after taking the words of suspect and send them a warning which reads more like a "friendly reminder". Or they misrepresent the diffs that are presented as evidence and claim the results to be unrelated or inconclusive. ] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 09:12, 12 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:12, 12 April 2015
|
ATTENTION SCUM. When I am king, you will be first against the wall. With your opinion which is of no consequence at all. |
|---|
Template:DailyBracketBot Template:Archive box collapsible
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda closed
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedy has been enacted:
1.1) For his violations of the standards of conduct expected of administrators, DangerousPanda (talk · contribs) is desysopped. He may regain the tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:03, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Woot Woot! ... oops,sorry, pardon my lack of decorum ... a bit of schadenfreude perhaps ...
- --Kevjonesin (talk) 10:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- It was a great day. Made my Christmas. Lugnuts 10:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- This page is worth a chuckle or two, too! Lugnuts 14:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- It was a great day. Made my Christmas. Lugnuts 10:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Ned Flanders
is a good pick. :D Mattsnow81 (Talk) 20:58, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, great race! Freaking drivers should look out the windshield. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 21:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Nomination of Tangerine Records (1990) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tangerine Records (1990) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Tangerine Records (1990) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wgolf (talk) 22:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Gérard Kerbrat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Brest
- Hubert Graignic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Bretagne
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Lapadite (talk) 21:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
April 2015
I can't believe you reinserted your attack on a departed user. I don't give a crap if you're "right" or not, it's nothing to the purpose. Don't do it again or you will be blocked. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 11 April 2015 (UTC).
Buzzards watch me sock
Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Buzzards-Watch Me Work.
- I am seeing that the amount of those SPIs are on increase nowadays where you find lack of any policy based results. Clerks usually turn the sock puppetry case into meat puppetry after taking the words of suspect and send them a warning which reads more like a "friendly reminder". Or they misrepresent the diffs that are presented as evidence and claim the results to be unrelated or inconclusive. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:12, 12 April 2015 (UTC)