| Revision as of 18:23, 6 October 2013 editThewolfchild (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers51,952 edits Final warning: Personal attack directed at a specific editor on Talk:Intellectual disability. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:24, 6 October 2013 edit undoThewolfchild (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers51,952 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
| :Sounds good to me. ] <small>(])</small> 15:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC) | :Sounds good to me. ] <small>(])</small> 15:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ==October 2013== | |||
| ] This is your '''last warning'''. The next time you make ] on other people, as you did at ], you may be '''] without further notice'''. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.<!-- Template:uw-npa4 --> ''You have been previously, and recently, been warned of this already (which you deleted). Yet, you have continued with your personal attacks with these edits , , & . This behaviour is unbecoming of an editor, especially one that is also an administrator.'' - ''''']''''' 18:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC) | ] This is your '''last warning'''. The next time you make ] on other people, as you did at ], you may be '''] without further notice'''. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.<!-- Template:uw-npa4 --> ''You have been previously, and recently, been warned of this already (which you deleted). Yet, you have continued with your personal attacks with these edits , , & . This behaviour is unbecoming of an editor, especially one that is also an administrator.'' - ''''']''''' 18:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:24, 6 October 2013
| This is Toddst1's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Talkback
Message added 18:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- thewolfchild 18:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Here...
...you can this back. For the second time, stay off my talk page. - thewolfchild 19:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- Second time? What are you talking about? Toddst1 (talk) 19:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- First time (it hasn't been that long...) - thewolfchild 20:30, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry I didn't remember it. Toddst1 (talk) 21:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- First time (it hasn't been that long...) - thewolfchild 20:30, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
October 2013
Constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. - thewolfchild 19:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Elite Traveler magazine
Hi your last edit had the summary: "Rm off-topic / trivia. We don't list what magazines have reported on. (TW)". The Misplaced Pages article states that the magazine "caters to Ultra-High-Net-Worth consumers" but does not mention what "ultra high net worth", a financial jargon, entails. It uses a citation entitled "Private Jet Set Kicking the Bucket List". The report you removed was entitled "the new jet set" and contained specific, non-obvious demographic information about private jet demographic, which may be the intended readers of a magazine that calls itself "Elite", a subjective adjective which calls for some qualification. Income and net worth information explain ultra-high-net-worth within the context of the article. If demographic information is irrelevant, why should the article mention who the magazine is for in the first place? Shawnc (talk) 23:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
I found a direct citation about the magazine's reader demographics from their own website. I trust that this information is relevant in conjunction with the Forbes article. Shawnc (talk) 07:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. Toddst1 (talk) 15:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
October 2013
This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Intellectual disability, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. You have been previously, and recently, been warned of this already (which you deleted). Yet, you have continued with your personal attacks with these edits 1, 2, 3 & 4. This behaviour is unbecoming of an editor, especially one that is also an administrator. - thewolfchild 18:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)