User talk:Armon: Difference between revisions
→please stop censoring legitimate information: The issue is that it is '''not''' well sourced. If you want to pursue this further, I suggest you open a content RFC, rather than edit warring. |
|||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
:The issue is that it is '''not''' well sourced. If you want to pursue this further, I suggest you open a content RFC, rather than edit warring. [[User:Armon|<<-armon->>]] 23:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC) |
:The issue is that it is '''not''' well sourced. If you want to pursue this further, I suggest you open a content RFC, rather than edit warring. [[User:Armon|<<-armon->>]] 23:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
::You were the one edit warring. Things would be a lot easier for everyone if, instead of trying to censor everything you disagree with, and stubbornly wikilawyering the issue to death, you simply tried to work with other editors to resolve conflicts amicably. A key to doing that would be that when you see facts published that make you uncomfortable, you research further facts to counter those facts, rather than trying to browbeat those facts into nonexistence. Ultimately, you see, the truth will come out whether you like it or not. All your bullying does is annoy people; it is entirely ineffective at the actual censorship you seek. [[User:Commodore Sloat|csloat]] 05:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 05:45, 6 August 2007
| This is Armon's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: Index, 1 |
Please Note:
From now on, I will respond to conversations started on this page, here. Cheers, <<-armon->>
User notice: temporary 3RR block
Regarding reversions[1] made on January 2 2007 to Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute
- I apologize for that. I made it in error and went to sleep before seeing the msg to self revert (which may not have been enough anyway). Until further notice, I'm placing myself on WP:1RR because a) I can't seem to count reverts properly, especially when there is more than one contentious passage, and b) edit warring is counterproductive anyway.
I don't think it's possible to be unblocked from talk pages but still blocked from articles and there's no basis for requesting an unblock, so discussions I'm involved in will have to wait 24 hours. <<-armon->> 00:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
User notice: temporary 3RR block
Regarding reversions[2] made on February 24 2007 to Middle East Media Research Institute
Also, I don't see any discussion from you recently
William M. Connolley 14:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)- I haven't breeched 3RR on the MEMRI page on the 24th -or since my last block as far as I can tell. In fact, I've been trying to stick to 1RR even if I make what's effectively a rv in a series of distinct edits which I explain in the edit summaries. I HAVE been reverting non RS cites and OR. I have discussed this on talk, ad nauseam, to no avail. In any case, I believe this was made in error so please unblock.
- A thousand apologies - I got the dates wrong. Unblocked in a moment... William M. Connolley 22:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks William. <<-armon->> 22:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Request For Mediation
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/David Irving, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.
Arbitration
Hello. I've requested arbitration on the disagreement over the MEMRI page which includes you as an interested party. Currently at Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration. Thanks, Jgui 15:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Deleting other editors talk page comments
Could you explain your actions at talk:Al-Aqsa Intifada? Tiamat 17:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- See WP:NOT#Community. My comment may not have been civil enough, his certainly wasn't. In any case, nothing new was said, therefore it was a waste of space which just fills up the talk page with cruft and makes it more difficult to get fresh editors to comment. <<-armon->> 21:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Deleting material between 4,000 and 6,000 bytes of sourced material at two articles
Could you explain you deletion of sourced material at Palestinian people and House demolition in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? The deletion of sourced material without explanation or discussion is considered vandalism. Thank you. Tiamat 16:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- No, actually, it's not. Read WP:VANDAL and stop trying to bully people. Jayjg (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Deletions
I have brought the subject up at WP:ANI and just now mentioned your name. As a courtesy, I thought you should know. Tiamat 19:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. That was courteous. Cheers <<-armon->> 01:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
please stop censoring legitimate information
Please stop removing well sourced information from acknowledged authorities. Your actions at this point are simply vandalism. csloat 12:51, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
- The issue is that it is not well sourced. If you want to pursue this further, I suggest you open a content RFC, rather than edit warring. <<-armon->> 23:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
- You were the one edit warring. Things would be a lot easier for everyone if, instead of trying to censor everything you disagree with, and stubbornly wikilawyering the issue to death, you simply tried to work with other editors to resolve conflicts amicably. A key to doing that would be that when you see facts published that make you uncomfortable, you research further facts to counter those facts, rather than trying to browbeat those facts into nonexistence. Ultimately, you see, the truth will come out whether you like it or not. All your bullying does is annoy people; it is entirely ineffective at the actual censorship you seek. csloat 05:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)