This is an old revision of this page, as edited by William Sommer (talk | contribs) at 18:44, 16 April 2015 (add). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:44, 16 April 2015 by William Sommer (talk | contribs) (add)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)You seem to have fcommunicate with me and I do not feel competent to do what you ask so can only do what it is that I can to identify such mistakes.[[User:William Sommer|William Sommermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson ([[User administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC)
2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) ittle self-reflection. You have accused almost everyone here of one type of bias or another, but what about your use of the term "WP'dians"? The use of that term could be consider derogatory towards Native Americans. --I am One of Many (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- You're kidding, right?— Jeraphine Gryphon 20:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- My very sentiments. It is just part of the barrage that comes with the environment right now with the board discussion. I just add it up to being the flavor of the week.William Sommer (talk) 22:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Why not apply it to all 'dians since the example was clearly for WP. It never said or implied as you would like for it to be characterized as such. Why not have one of the Native American group comment on your behalf.William Sommer (talk) 19:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
April 2015
Do not post on my talk page again. ClaireWalzer (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make [[Misplaced Pages:No personal attacksmeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritativmeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) e administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) |personal attacks]] on other people, as you did at User talk:ClaireWalzer. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Jim1138 (talk) 08:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC) , or it will be added to a case that you should be indefinitely blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
No, what has happened does not work that way and you above all should know that regardless what wants to be changed. You cannot say that the Romans wish that they never crucified Jesus as an entendre to bringitalk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more meant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong hermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) e, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative ng him back to life. To say more is just to support your previous assessment that anything I said was a rant.William Sommer (talk) 17:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Order of events:
- 1) Claire used the original heading.
- 2) Claire almost immediately changed the heading she added, as is her right according to WP:REDACT, in an attempt to show good-faith.
- 3) [https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:William_Sommermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If smeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a chatalk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more meant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong hermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) e, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative nge then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) he wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) &diff=prev&oldid=656710819 You changed what she wrote], which is forbidden by WP:TPO, in a petty attempt to assume bad faith (unless you