| Revision as of 02:31, 16 May 2013 editPeaDray (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users782 edits →3RR warning← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:58, 16 May 2013 edit undoFarrajak (talk | contribs)814 edits →3RR warning: reasonNext edit → | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| * Congratulations, you've done exactly what I just told you I was going to do. Well, at least we agree that this is a matter for third-party reflection. I'm too busy to pursue this right now, but I would heartily recommend that you re-read your various recent revisions. There is practically no consistency to your different interventions, and you frequently ask for references to items which are in no way contentious. Providing references for the general content description of the journal or its contributors is plainly absurd. I've never reported anyone, and I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so, but undoing your persistent non-sensical edits has tested my patience too far.] (]) 02:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC) | * Congratulations, you've done exactly what I just told you I was going to do. Well, at least we agree that this is a matter for third-party reflection. I'm too busy to pursue this right now, but I would heartily recommend that you re-read your various recent revisions. There is practically no consistency to your different interventions, and you frequently ask for references to items which are in no way contentious. Providing references for the general content description of the journal or its contributors is plainly absurd. I've never reported anyone, and I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so, but undoing your persistent non-sensical edits has tested my patience too far.] (]) 02:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :*I was trying to offer different suggestions to see if there was something you would accept - any sign that you were willing to work with another editor. But even though the article is aready tagged with a "notability needed" tag, you reverted within seconds anything I did. And didn't address my problems on the talk page, but just denied them. ] (]) 02:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:58, 16 May 2013
Refusecollection, you are invited to the Teahouse
| [REDACTED] |
Hi Refusecollection! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. |
Talkback
Message added 14:50, 17 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Randykitty (talk) 14:50, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Lacan, translator?
You added Category:Translators of Sigmund Freud to the Lacan biography article. Did he publish any of his own translations from Freud's German? IIf so, I don't think it is otherwise mentioned in the article text. AllyD (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- In 1932, Lacan translated Freud's 1922 text "Über einige neurotische Mechanismen bei Eifersucht, Paranoia und Homosexualität" as "De quelques mécanismes névrotiques dans la jalousie, la paranoïa et l'homosexualité". It was published in the Revue française de psychanalyse, tome V, Issue 3, pp. 391-401. I'll add it to the Lacan article as you suggest. Refusecollection (talk) 13:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
File:Debut.Cov.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Debut.Cov.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
File:Letter.Accoyer.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Letter.Accoyer.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Scilicet.6.7.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Scilicet.6.7.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
3RR warning
I'm going to report you for edit warring if you revert my attempts to improve the article by removing overcategorizations, and by reverting my requests for citations with no attempt to provide them. Thanks, Farrajak (talk) 02:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
- Congratulations, you've done exactly what I just told you I was going to do. Well, at least we agree that this is a matter for third-party reflection. I'm too busy to pursue this right now, but I would heartily recommend that you re-read your various recent revisions. There is practically no consistency to your different interventions, and you frequently ask for references to items which are in no way contentious. Providing references for the general content description of the journal or its contributors is plainly absurd. I've never reported anyone, and I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so, but undoing your persistent non-sensical edits has tested my patience too far.Refusecollection (talk) 02:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
- I was trying to offer different suggestions to see if there was something you would accept - any sign that you were willing to work with another editor. But even though the article is aready tagged with a "notability needed" tag, you reverted within seconds anything I did. And didn't address my problems on the talk page, but just denied them. Farrajak (talk) 02:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)