| Revision as of 22:58, 23 March 2011 editMbz1 (talk | contribs)22,338 edits Thank you← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:43, 23 March 2011 edit undoMbz1 (talk | contribs)22,338 edits →Misplaced Pages:In_the_news/Candidates#2011_Jerusalem_bombing: disagree with your assesmentNext edit → | ||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
| ::::I saw you did defend me. Thank you! BTW my memory for user names is way too short. I forgot me and you ever had a conflict, :-) | ::::I saw you did defend me. Thank you! BTW my memory for user names is way too short. I forgot me and you ever had a conflict, :-) | ||
| ::::About my report on Passionless edit warring. I did not say the user violated 3RR. The user violated 1RR. It is the user editing restrictions, no more that 1 RR per page per week. Best wishes.--] (]) 22:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC) | ::::About my report on Passionless edit warring. I did not say the user violated 3RR. The user violated 1RR. It is the user editing restrictions, no more that 1 RR per page per week. Best wishes.--] (]) 22:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
| ::::And no, my comment was posted in response to those two comments and . It was not inflammatory, it was taken out of content and removed by an involved administrator. By him removing my comment only leaving two other to stand, and then coming to my talk page with a silly "final warning" he demonstrated not only his complete inability to perform his administrative duties, but also his strong ].--] (]) 23:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:43, 23 March 2011
| |
| archives 1 |
== Edit summary at Itamar killings ==
"Do not do this ever again" is an unacceptable edit summary. What did you really mean by that? --Frederico1234 (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:In_the_news/Candidates#2011_Jerusalem_bombing
I don't care who started this conflict between you and Passionless, but you're now on notice . Keep it off of WP:ITNC.--Chaser (talk) 19:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- I am afraid your post looks more like a screaming and a threat to block me than a fair administrative conduct. I have done nothing wrong. I voted to support the article in the news, and explained why user:passionless's vote was false, providing the link from RS. So, I would really appreciate, if you are to stop screaming, stop comparing me to user:passionless, and better explain to me what exactly I've done wrong in your opinion. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you're welcome to pursue the usual avenue of appeal if you think my warning was inappropriate. I answered your question.--Chaser (talk) 20:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- I would have never reported you to AN/I for this. I assume it was a a good faith warning and you simply did not have enough time to asses the situation. There's absolutely no comparison between my vote and user:passionless responses. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you're welcome to pursue the usual avenue of appeal if you think my warning was inappropriate. I answered your question.--Chaser (talk) 20:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- Final warning. If you're just looking to start trouble and soapbox about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, you've come to the wrong place. -- tariqabjotu 22:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- I undid you. I have done nothing wrong. Be aware, you may not block me. You are an involved administrator.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- MBiz, I just defended you on Chaser's page, I believe his warning/admonition was unjustified/premature. That being said, the edit Tariq deleted was probably over the line inflamatory... not enough on it's own merit to warrant a "final warning" but enough to be removed.---Balloonman 22:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- I saw you did defend me. Thank you! BTW my memory for user names is way too short. I forgot me and you ever had a conflict, :-)
- About my report on Passionless edit warring. I did not say the user violated 3RR. The user violated 1RR. It is the user editing restrictions, no more that 1 RR per page per week. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- And no, my comment was posted in response to those two comments #1 and #2. It was not inflammatory, it was taken out of content and removed by an involved administrator. By him removing my comment only leaving two other to stand, and then coming to my talk page with a silly "final warning" he demonstrated not only his complete inability to perform his administrative duties, but also his strong POV.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- MBiz, I just defended you on Chaser's page, I believe his warning/admonition was unjustified/premature. That being said, the edit Tariq deleted was probably over the line inflamatory... not enough on it's own merit to warrant a "final warning" but enough to be removed.---Balloonman 22:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- I undid you. I have done nothing wrong. Be aware, you may not block me. You are an involved administrator.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)