| Revision as of 00:54, 14 December 2010 editKuguar03 (talk | contribs)1,348 edits →Try to avoid personal attacks← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:37, 14 December 2010 edit undoJkrell (talk | contribs)52 edits →Try to avoid personal attacksNext edit → | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
| :Although I could be wrong, I don't believe that I assumed bad faith. Do you mind explaining to me why you think that? Perhaps we'll be able to come to a better understanding.--''']]''' 23:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | :Although I could be wrong, I don't believe that I assumed bad faith. Do you mind explaining to me why you think that? Perhaps we'll be able to come to a better understanding.--''']]''' 23:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| ::You said "An article being poorly written is no reason for deletion", though that was not the reason given. You said I "should show more discretion in nominating articles for deletion in the future" though the nomination was perfectly valid. It was ultimately declined, but that's how the process works. I did nothing wrong by nominating it, if editors didn't nominate because they might get declined the system wouldn't work. The status of the creator has nothing to do with it. Given that, is there some interpretation of what you said that doesn't involve assumption of bad faith? I must be missing something. I wouldn't attack another editor in a public forum for any reason, but definitely not for completely made up ones. ] (]) 00:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC) | ::You said "An article being poorly written is no reason for deletion", though that was not the reason given. You said I "should show more discretion in nominating articles for deletion in the future" though the nomination was perfectly valid. It was ultimately declined, but that's how the process works. I did nothing wrong by nominating it, if editors didn't nominate because they might get declined the system wouldn't work. The status of the creator has nothing to do with it. Given that, is there some interpretation of what you said that doesn't involve assumption of bad faith? I must be missing something. I wouldn't attack another editor in a public forum for any reason, but definitely not for completely made up ones. ] (]) 00:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Thanks for coming to bat for me Piast. I'm very new here and still learning the ropes. I'll admit I don't write especially well but I have been intrigued to see this process unfold. Thanks. ] (]) 02:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:37, 14 December 2010
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Piast93, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Montenegro. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!
Tea with toast (talk) 18:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your Poland-related contributions
|
Hello and welcome Piast93! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Poland, joining the project, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with our community. |
--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Talkback notice
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
ConCompS talk 20:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Nice work
Good job with your quick revert. I decided to make a little joke, but I'm impressed at how quickly you caught it and reverted. People like you really help keep Misplaced Pages as a serious encyclopedia. 67.241.25.231 (talk) 01:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Great work
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| Good job patrolling recent changes! Keep it up :P Netalarm 03:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC) |
- Thanks. Have a nice day!--Piast93 (talk) 03:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Try to avoid personal attacks
As I'm sure you know, your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jeepspeed were completely inappropriate and uninformed. Please try to assume good faith and respect other editors in the future. Thanks. Kuguar03 (talk) 22:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Although I could be wrong, I don't believe that I assumed bad faith. Do you mind explaining to me why you think that? Perhaps we'll be able to come to a better understanding.--Piast93 23:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- You said "An article being poorly written is no reason for deletion", though that was not the reason given. You said I "should show more discretion in nominating articles for deletion in the future" though the nomination was perfectly valid. It was ultimately declined, but that's how the process works. I did nothing wrong by nominating it, if editors didn't nominate because they might get declined the system wouldn't work. The status of the creator has nothing to do with it. Given that, is there some interpretation of what you said that doesn't involve assumption of bad faith? I must be missing something. I wouldn't attack another editor in a public forum for any reason, but definitely not for completely made up ones. Kuguar03 (talk) 00:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for coming to bat for me Piast. I'm very new here and still learning the ropes. I'll admit I don't write especially well but I have been intrigued to see this process unfold. Thanks. Jkrell (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)