| Revision as of 23:20, 2 July 2010 edit184.59.77.102 (talk) I have seen the omarcheeseboro light← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:06, 3 July 2010 edit undoSalvio giuliano (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators49,151 edits →My "Contributions": suggestionNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| :You've already been informed that your actions amount to ], in that you're trying to prove a point by disrupting this encyclopaedia. My suggestion to you is to stop, because such a behaviour can only bring about a block. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml"> ''']'''</span> (]) 00:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:06, 3 July 2010
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages 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) 20:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
A friendly warning
Say now, I understand you are a bit frustrated, but you might want to read WP:POINT before you get in hot water. Just sayin'. Jusdafax 23:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Administrator's noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 23:14, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
WP:ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Salvio ( ) 23:15, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I have seen the light
I am no longer frustrated; I have seen the light. While I admit that at first I thought that omarcheeseboro's actions in deleting material that I had added was a fine example of laziness fueled by the thrill of lording over others - I now see that his why is much better.
Trying to contribute by taking the effort to add information and context to articles is a fool's errand. It is just SO easy to simply negate the efforts of people who are simply trying to contribute whilst hiding behind rules that were clearly meant to control actively malicious persons - why do anything else?
I have made it my stated goal to reduce the total number of words contained on[REDACTED] in half - simply by summarily removing ANYTHING that is unsourced . I will certainly not be selfish though; I will give credit to my mentor - omarcheeseboro -in the comments to all of my "contributions".
I look forward to experiencing the satisfaction of dealing with the complaints of those whose work I have dismissed when they show up here and demand an explanation. I will of course not tax myself by talking to them like adults; no instead I will simply counter the arguments they painstakingly write with pasted boilerplate and links that take me no time at all. Perhaps I will just set up a macro so I only have to hit one key to diminish someone.
Now that I have been shown how the TRUE wikipedian behaves; I will comport myself accordingly.
My "Contributions"
Articles corrected by myself using the omarcheeseboro method:
- You've already been informed that your actions amount to WP:POINT, in that you're trying to prove a point by disrupting this encyclopaedia. My suggestion to you is to stop, because such a behaviour can only bring about a block. Salvio ( ) 00:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)