User talk:NJA
|
Welcome to NJA's talk page! Please click here to leave me a new message. |
|
|---|
Hello, Nja247! It's Airplaneman... I'm here to ask for some advice, as you are a more experienced editor than I. It's about the aforementioned article. I revamped it and would like some suggestions on where it should go from here (I'm not sure where to steer it). I'll definitely elaborate more on the computer's history, but I'd like to get it to GA someday (like MacBook) and I think it needs more than what I've got to offer. Thanks, Airplaneman talk 23:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oh goodness, sorry for the delay. I've been way too busy in real life to do anything on here. If it wasn't for a minor foot injury I wouldn't have even seen this. Good luck and I will look over if I can, but you may wish to employ someone who's much more active than I currently am. Cheers mate! Nja247 09:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Kingpin gave me a hand. No worries, feel better soon! Airplaneman talk 03:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
EDA Capital Connect
hi,
I want to why my page EDA Capital Connect is deleted, also my id has been blocked, any specific reason.
Thanks Puneet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Impunnu (talk • contribs) 07:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Brian
Hello, hope your having a nice day. Have you seen User:BrianBeahr's talk page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AFL and [1] St Kilda talk page, along with his block log? We have been patient but we're now getting tired of his edits. Regards, Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 09:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I have, though here you've also had three reverts in a 24 hour period, and the edits do not constitute clear vandalism, thus edit warring cannot be excused. If he continues to revert without discussion after my warning on his talk page, then you should report it to me or at WP:AN3 for him to be blocked. Cheers, Nja247 09:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- No, I haven't breached the 3rr. The rule says, "... a user who makes more than three revert actions (of any kind) on any one page within a 24-hour period." I haven't done so. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 09:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly, read my notice on your talk page and my 1st reply above where I said you've also had three reverts'; not four. If you had four and had breached the rule you would be more likely to have received a block rather than the warning. To be clear, neither you or him have more than three reverts at this time. Generally, if you're having difficulty getting discussion with him, consider WP:DR. Nja247 09:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I don't really appreciate automated warnings either, especially when I didn't do anything incorrect and stopped reverting so I didn't breach 3rr. Not to worry. Incorrect, Brian has reverted at least four times. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 09:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Mate, if you had read the warning, it didn't say you breached 3RR, it said you're in danger of breaching it and it gave guidance on how to resolve the dispute without getting blocked. Automated or not, it said exactly what I wanted to tell you (as I wrote the template). For the last time, I never said you breached 3RR. Arguing with me over something I didn't even say will not resolve the issue, and if you feel that other user has reverted four times you may compile a report and submit it to WP:AN3. However, if after my warning he stops reverting, an admin is unlikely to take action as there's no longer any disruption to Wikipedia. I hope you're able to resolve the situation and I wish you luck with it, but I don't believe there's anything further myself or another admin can do at this time. Nja247 09:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- No point arguing. It's just we are where we were at 12 months ago and we are going around in circles wasting time. Best wishes and happy editing. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 10:04, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Mate, if you had read the warning, it didn't say you breached 3RR, it said you're in danger of breaching it and it gave guidance on how to resolve the dispute without getting blocked. Automated or not, it said exactly what I wanted to tell you (as I wrote the template). For the last time, I never said you breached 3RR. Arguing with me over something I didn't even say will not resolve the issue, and if you feel that other user has reverted four times you may compile a report and submit it to WP:AN3. However, if after my warning he stops reverting, an admin is unlikely to take action as there's no longer any disruption to Wikipedia. I hope you're able to resolve the situation and I wish you luck with it, but I don't believe there's anything further myself or another admin can do at this time. Nja247 09:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I don't really appreciate automated warnings either, especially when I didn't do anything incorrect and stopped reverting so I didn't breach 3rr. Not to worry. Incorrect, Brian has reverted at least four times. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 09:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly, read my notice on your talk page and my 1st reply above where I said you've also had three reverts'; not four. If you had four and had breached the rule you would be more likely to have received a block rather than the warning. To be clear, neither you or him have more than three reverts at this time. Generally, if you're having difficulty getting discussion with him, consider WP:DR. Nja247 09:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- No, I haven't breached the 3rr. The rule says, "... a user who makes more than three revert actions (of any kind) on any one page within a 24-hour period." I haven't done so. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 09:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Please be constructive with the Section on Symbolisms of light bulbs
Hi there I noticed that you obviously dislike my contribution enough to assume that everyone else felt the same and therefore should be spared the eye sore of my addition altogether. Why did you remove my work so promptly instead of making constructive edits to it? If you don't want to help, at least give others a chance to. I request you to at most just tag my section as "verification needed" and leave it there for other editors to modify. --Junsun (talk) 20:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)