And I was so proud of finding that picture. KimChee ( talk) 11:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
The kindly little darwinfish is alarmed ]
[1] Run, mr user! Please! Run for the hills! [Mystified. ] Talkback.. ? Oh, no, I never talk back!
darwin
fish
01:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC).
Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Counter-missionary. You have been one of the major contributors to the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Borock ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 21 January 2011
How did you do it? -- Tyw7 ( ☎ Contact me! • Contributions) Changing the world one at a time! 10:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Go on, I dares you! I double-dares you!!
1 Very interesting. I've never heard "run in" used to mean "arrest" before. I wonder if it's a UK thing. I'm an English teacher that grew up in Los Angeles. 110.47.110.233 ( talk) 20:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Please tell me what you mean by "take it to AfD", I am a newbie to wikipedia. 92.24.111.250 ( talk) 15:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Pablo, have I done it correctly? PandP2go ( talk) 15:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Here, did you mean to take out those other messages? -- John ( talk) 07:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello
This is to let you know that there is a question you may be interested in answering at User talk: Jimbo Wales#Can you please explain what this is about? Someone is wondering why their name appears on one of your lists?-- 5 albert square ( talk) 15:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I have an article ready for deletion here which remains stubbornly undeleted. I picked you because you're at the top of the "what links here" list. Og of Bashan ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:25, 13 June 2011 (UTC).
Been meaning to do this for a while ... makes it a bit clearer, no? Black Kite (t) (c)
{{ adminhelp}} Anybody feel like weighing in on this? Maybe a chat about personal attacks and the difference between stalking and whatever the hell this user imagines is going on? pablo 13:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
This made me chuckle. And, on the subject of that page, isn't it curious that three listed accounts, none of which seems to have been used in weeks (or, in the case of one, six months), should suddenly all start editing again within a 24-hour period? Of course, I shall infer nothing from these unusual coincidences. Super Mario Man 02:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
→
You are cordially invited to User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines as I feel its going live is imminent and I value additional eyes and input. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Pablo X! The policy on putting up the template:main states that it should be put up above a summary and linked to the main (more detailed) article. On the MoMK article, the template was used above a paragraph that was more detailed than the main article on the subject. On the talk page, I had indicated two options:
Every editor who discussed the issue, including you, agreed that the summary had more details than the main article, and so there seemed to be consensus that the tag was not as per the policy. There were various views on the second option i.e. moving the details to the main article, but nobody objected to the first option. I took this as consent. In fact, you even stated: "It's not my concern – it's Tinpisa's if anyones. I don't care whether it says 'see main' or 'see also' or whatever". I communicated my decision to remove the tag, and requested all the editors to not to revert me; on the edit summary, I politely requested "removing {{main|Amanda Knox}} as per consensus on talk page ~ pls do not revert, but discuss your concern on the talk page. Thanks ~)". You brought up the topic for discussion at 12:28 and reverted me at 12:35. I did not like the way you made the revert (you had patience for only seven minutes), inspite of my polite request to discuss any revert on the talk page. Tinpisa ( talk) 17:22, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an
explanatory essay about the
Wikipedia:Consensus and
Wikipedia:Be bold pages. This page provides additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. |
Read carefully – does it say, its a policy? This is a possible way, when there has been no discussion beforehand. When there was discussion, it should not have been necessary. Consensus is defined as Consensus, on Wikipedia, is not necessarily unanimity. Ideally, it arrives with an absence of objections .... Were there any objections to removing the tag? I appreciate your apologies, and accept them. I hope you would be a more polite and more cordial in future. Tinpisa ( talk) 21:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the summary. Still baffled as to how you managed to construe the discussion in the way you did. But at the risk of repeating myself, good luck in the future, and once again, and sincerely, goodbye. pablo 22:48, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mcferran – Sitush ( talk) 00:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
{{ adminhelp}}
File:Mary Irene Curzon.jpg is actually a picture of Lady Alexandra Curzon. I cannot move the file to a different title, but it's probably sensible to do so. pablo 16:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Love it. Reminds me of my childhood and part of my heritage. Our family's
X-mas crib always had him sitting outside taking care of his business :)
Merry X-mas to you,
TMCk (
talk)
23:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() ![]() |
Happy 2012 !!! | |
Dear Pablo, May the Year to Come Bring You Great Happiness. Very Best Wishes, Super Mario Man 02:35, 1 January 2012 (UTC) |
And I was so proud of finding that picture. KimChee ( talk) 11:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
The kindly little darwinfish is alarmed ]
[1] Run, mr user! Please! Run for the hills! [Mystified. ] Talkback.. ? Oh, no, I never talk back!
darwin
fish
01:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC).
Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Counter-missionary. You have been one of the major contributors to the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Borock ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 21 January 2011
How did you do it? -- Tyw7 ( ☎ Contact me! • Contributions) Changing the world one at a time! 10:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Go on, I dares you! I double-dares you!!
1 Very interesting. I've never heard "run in" used to mean "arrest" before. I wonder if it's a UK thing. I'm an English teacher that grew up in Los Angeles. 110.47.110.233 ( talk) 20:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Please tell me what you mean by "take it to AfD", I am a newbie to wikipedia. 92.24.111.250 ( talk) 15:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Pablo, have I done it correctly? PandP2go ( talk) 15:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Here, did you mean to take out those other messages? -- John ( talk) 07:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello
This is to let you know that there is a question you may be interested in answering at User talk: Jimbo Wales#Can you please explain what this is about? Someone is wondering why their name appears on one of your lists?-- 5 albert square ( talk) 15:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I have an article ready for deletion here which remains stubbornly undeleted. I picked you because you're at the top of the "what links here" list. Og of Bashan ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:25, 13 June 2011 (UTC).
Been meaning to do this for a while ... makes it a bit clearer, no? Black Kite (t) (c)
{{ adminhelp}} Anybody feel like weighing in on this? Maybe a chat about personal attacks and the difference between stalking and whatever the hell this user imagines is going on? pablo 13:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
This made me chuckle. And, on the subject of that page, isn't it curious that three listed accounts, none of which seems to have been used in weeks (or, in the case of one, six months), should suddenly all start editing again within a 24-hour period? Of course, I shall infer nothing from these unusual coincidences. Super Mario Man 02:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
→
You are cordially invited to User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines as I feel its going live is imminent and I value additional eyes and input. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Pablo X! The policy on putting up the template:main states that it should be put up above a summary and linked to the main (more detailed) article. On the MoMK article, the template was used above a paragraph that was more detailed than the main article on the subject. On the talk page, I had indicated two options:
Every editor who discussed the issue, including you, agreed that the summary had more details than the main article, and so there seemed to be consensus that the tag was not as per the policy. There were various views on the second option i.e. moving the details to the main article, but nobody objected to the first option. I took this as consent. In fact, you even stated: "It's not my concern – it's Tinpisa's if anyones. I don't care whether it says 'see main' or 'see also' or whatever". I communicated my decision to remove the tag, and requested all the editors to not to revert me; on the edit summary, I politely requested "removing {{main|Amanda Knox}} as per consensus on talk page ~ pls do not revert, but discuss your concern on the talk page. Thanks ~)". You brought up the topic for discussion at 12:28 and reverted me at 12:35. I did not like the way you made the revert (you had patience for only seven minutes), inspite of my polite request to discuss any revert on the talk page. Tinpisa ( talk) 17:22, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an
explanatory essay about the
Wikipedia:Consensus and
Wikipedia:Be bold pages. This page provides additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. |
Read carefully – does it say, its a policy? This is a possible way, when there has been no discussion beforehand. When there was discussion, it should not have been necessary. Consensus is defined as Consensus, on Wikipedia, is not necessarily unanimity. Ideally, it arrives with an absence of objections .... Were there any objections to removing the tag? I appreciate your apologies, and accept them. I hope you would be a more polite and more cordial in future. Tinpisa ( talk) 21:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the summary. Still baffled as to how you managed to construe the discussion in the way you did. But at the risk of repeating myself, good luck in the future, and once again, and sincerely, goodbye. pablo 22:48, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mcferran – Sitush ( talk) 00:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
{{ adminhelp}}
File:Mary Irene Curzon.jpg is actually a picture of Lady Alexandra Curzon. I cannot move the file to a different title, but it's probably sensible to do so. pablo 16:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Love it. Reminds me of my childhood and part of my heritage. Our family's
X-mas crib always had him sitting outside taking care of his business :)
Merry X-mas to you,
TMCk (
talk)
23:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() ![]() |
Happy 2012 !!! | |
Dear Pablo, May the Year to Come Bring You Great Happiness. Very Best Wishes, Super Mario Man 02:35, 1 January 2012 (UTC) |