User talk:Dance With The Devil

Welcome from Ioeth

Welcome!

Hello, Dance With The Devil, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 05:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bajrang Dal‎

Hi, could you watchlist this article. A recent edit war started and a user is repeatedly removing criticism from lead. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Dance With The Devil (talk) 01:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Encyclopedia Dramatica removal of discussion

While Wikipedia is not a forum, that is not an acceptable reason for blanking out parts of a talk page. While one of the comments you removed might be valid to remove due to its general incivility (and that is questionable, as some of us don't find that reason acceptable either) the second wasn't except so far as it was a reply to the first. Please acquaint yourself with WP:TALK#Editing comments before doing any further blanking of talk pages. --coldacid (talk|contrib) 21:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The comment I removed bordered on gibberish and contained personal attacks. There's no reason to leave blatant trolling on a talk page. Dance With The Devil (talk) 23:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should take it to RPP. It seems to be more than one IP attacking it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 01:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did say that the first of the two you blanked was possibly valid. Just make sure if you're blanking comments from talk pages, cite the most appropriate reason for it. --coldacid (talk|contrib) 17:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Barnstar

Thanks a lot for your kind thought. The barnstar is very much appreciated. Majorly ^talk 23:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Calling someone a terrorist sympathizer, as you did in this edit summary:

Sceptre is clearly a terrorist sympathizer, reverted

is totally unacceptable and constitutes a bald personal attack. There is an RfC ongoing at Talk:Osama bin Laden regarding this very issue, to which you are invited to participate. siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 23:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I must concur with Silly Rabbit; calling a British person, whom is clearly not a terrorist sympathiser, is completely and utterly wrong. Please refrain from commenting on contributors. If you have a problem with an edit; take it to the talk page. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 23:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calling him a terrorist sympathizer was probably a little bit over the top, but Sceptre has been known to disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point on many previous occasions and in this edit he called Dance with the Devil a "wikistalker" (just as he's done with others users he's had disagreements with in the past).--ParisianBlade (talk) 04:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter what Sceptre has done. This was a wanton personal attack, which isn't allowed. Gwen Gale (talk) 04:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kashmir conflict. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 13:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Illegal immigration in India

Hi,

I have somewhat enhanced the article Illegal immigration in India. Please review and comment on the talk page if the NPOV banner can be removed.

Thanks --Iball (talk) 16:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]