User talk:Wanderer602: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Wanderer602 (talk | contribs) |
→Blocked: r |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
::::I explained my changes. Others actually agree with me about simplifying the intro and separating the two views.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Tali-Ihantala&action=historysubmit&diff=454911765&oldid=454894330][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Tali-Ihantala&action=historysubmit&diff=453901007&oldid=453892568] -[[User:YMB29|YMB29]] ([[User talk:YMB29|talk]]) 20:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
::::I explained my changes. Others actually agree with me about simplifying the intro and separating the two views.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Tali-Ihantala&action=historysubmit&diff=454911765&oldid=454894330][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Tali-Ihantala&action=historysubmit&diff=453901007&oldid=453892568] -[[User:YMB29|YMB29]] ([[User talk:YMB29|talk]]) 20:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::::All true except what you did was not 'simplifying' the intro, you removed reliably sourced statement of the result from the intro and replaced it with one that you are comfortable with. That is POV pushing, nothing else. Furthermore you made the changes '''before''' even attempting to find an agreement in the talk page. First diff only agreed that intro should be simplified, not with your interpretation of simplifying it. Also the second diff only agrees with that Baryshnikov is a biased poor quality source, nothing else. In other words you are once again representing their statements as something else than what they really were. - [[User:Wanderer602|Wanderer602]] ([[User talk:Wanderer602#top|talk]]) 20:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
:::::All true except what you did was not 'simplifying' the intro, you removed reliably sourced statement of the result from the intro and replaced it with one that you are comfortable with. That is POV pushing, nothing else. Furthermore you made the changes '''before''' even attempting to find an agreement in the talk page. First diff only agreed that intro should be simplified, not with your interpretation of simplifying it. Also the second diff only agrees with that Baryshnikov is a biased poor quality source, nothing else. In other words you are once again representing their statements as something else than what they really were. - [[User:Wanderer602|Wanderer602]] ([[User talk:Wanderer602#top|talk]]) 20:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::::::I've unblocked Wanderer602. Someone please file a report at the [[WP:DRN|dispute resolution]] noticeboard. -'''[[User:Fastily|<span style='font-family: "Trebuchet MS"; color:#4B0082'><big>F</big><small>ASTILY</small></span>]]''' <sup><small>[[User talk:Fastily|<span style = 'color:#4B0082'>(TALK)</span>]]</small></sup> 20:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:48, 14 October 2011
Template:Archive box collapsible
The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Blocked
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. FASTILY (TALK) 18:15, 13 October 2011 (UTC)- Bottom line: I don't care who's right and who's wrong in this dispute. I protected Battle of Tali-Ihantala so as to avoid blocking either of you and to encourage collaborative discussion. Since you are more interested in reverting User:YMB29 as opposed to discussing, as shown by your revert immediately after protection expired, you are, unfortunately, blocked to prevent further disruption to the encyclopedia. -FASTILY (TALK) 18:15, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Apparently it is then illegal in wikipedia to revert edits which are done against wikipedia rules. Or at least by your judgment that is so. - Wanderer602 (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Talk about double standards. Without any discussion the changes were once again reverted. - Wanderer602 (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I explained my changes. Others actually agree with me about simplifying the intro and separating the two views.[1][2] -YMB29 (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- All true except what you did was not 'simplifying' the intro, you removed reliably sourced statement of the result from the intro and replaced it with one that you are comfortable with. That is POV pushing, nothing else. Furthermore you made the changes before even attempting to find an agreement in the talk page. First diff only agreed that intro should be simplified, not with your interpretation of simplifying it. Also the second diff only agrees with that Baryshnikov is a biased poor quality source, nothing else. In other words you are once again representing their statements as something else than what they really were. - Wanderer602 (talk) 20:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I've unblocked Wanderer602. Someone please file a report at the dispute resolution noticeboard. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- All true except what you did was not 'simplifying' the intro, you removed reliably sourced statement of the result from the intro and replaced it with one that you are comfortable with. That is POV pushing, nothing else. Furthermore you made the changes before even attempting to find an agreement in the talk page. First diff only agreed that intro should be simplified, not with your interpretation of simplifying it. Also the second diff only agrees with that Baryshnikov is a biased poor quality source, nothing else. In other words you are once again representing their statements as something else than what they really were. - Wanderer602 (talk) 20:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I explained my changes. Others actually agree with me about simplifying the intro and separating the two views.[1][2] -YMB29 (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Talk about double standards. Without any discussion the changes were once again reverted. - Wanderer602 (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Apparently it is then illegal in wikipedia to revert edits which are done against wikipedia rules. Or at least by your judgment that is so. - Wanderer602 (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)