User talk:Minesweeper.007
|
|
|
Nov 2006 ·
Dec 2006 ·
Jan 2007 ·
Feb 2007 ·
Mar 2007 ·
Apr 2007 ·
May 2007 ·
Jun 2007 ·
Jul 2007 ·
Aug 2007 ·
Sep 2007 ·
Oct 2007 |
|
My subpages are located here. |
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Hi 70.233.156.5 15:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
One Page
Hi Minesweeper, I just had a question about one of the pages I saw in CSD under your db-author requests. For some reason the CSD list shows User:Minesweeper.007/Top Dog as a page you requested to delete yet I do not see you placing the tag on that page anywhere in its edit history. Just wanted to confirm with you whether or not you want to keep the page? Thanks.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 19:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks MS :). So, how's life? The Hybrid 04:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Warriors
What do you think you're doing to all of the Warriors articles!? They were fine how they were. Nowhere were these sort of changes -ever - discussed, and I don't see them as needed in the least. As such, I'm reverting all of your edits. --~|ET|~(Talk|Contribs) 23:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- You don't have to come on so strongly, Electric! Mine's just being bold. But, ElectricTurahk DOES prove a point about not discussing it first, Minesweeper. Even though we're not restricted into making such an edit, it's best to talk it through on the talk pages first. Otherwise, as you can see already, people can get angry or confused about it. §ροττεδςταr(Talk|Contribs) 23:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, perhaps I was coming on strong (And my apologies for that - I was rash, and quick to react and judge. Far too quick to think rationally.), but I saw absolutely no reason to go and change it (Which is why discussing things was best). What was moved I see as being just fine the way it was. We don't need individual articles for everything on the Clans page (Nor do I imagine we would be allowed, seeing as there is the pre-existing page). And the characters pages are best organized (And limited in length) by being grouped in accordance go Clan (or other groups). --~|ET|~(Talk|Contribs) 23:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Might I also add that I had spent several hours fixing up the Clans page, and when I saw large amounts of text being removed, I was alarmed - At first, I thought it was vandalism, but then I saw that you were redirecting to a bunch of new pages... I felt as if my work was for nothing. And, yes, that set me off and spawned my offensive language, but in no way does that mean it was acceptable. I apologize for that and have removed it from my original message, but, unfortunately, that cannot be done to edit summaries... --~|ET|~(Talk|Contribs) 23:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, perhaps I was coming on strong (And my apologies for that - I was rash, and quick to react and judge. Far too quick to think rationally.), but I saw absolutely no reason to go and change it (Which is why discussing things was best). What was moved I see as being just fine the way it was. We don't need individual articles for everything on the Clans page (Nor do I imagine we would be allowed, seeing as there is the pre-existing page). And the characters pages are best organized (And limited in length) by being grouped in accordance go Clan (or other groups). --~|ET|~(Talk|Contribs) 23:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)