User talk:Jprg1966
|
June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 |
 | I make an effort to reply to all feedback. Please be civil. I may, for the sake of readability and page flow, make minor modifications to your comments' layout, but I will not edit their content. |
Please Be More Careful with RS Edits
I saw that you recently removed a citation attributed to a forum. It was actually from a major newspaper. Please be more careful in the future. DemocraticLuntz (talk) 00:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Really Should Be More Careful with UNDO
I noticed that you quickly deemed a valid edit "unconstructive." Wikipedia appreciates your efforts, but you should really be more careful when carelessly editing a constructive addition to a page. --unsigned comment by 107.202.140.255 (talk · contribs) at 02:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Trolls will be ignored in the order in which they troll. --Jprg1966 (talk) 02:42, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
-Agree with the above. You edited my fan page: Claydad without blinking an eye, when I left a notice that says to leave it as a discussion after I discovered it. I am Claydad, and a fan made the page/user for me. Thanks for looking out on the wikis. <3 --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.203.235.104 (talk)
- The user above was a troll. In any case, I'm sorry -- I did not see you left your user page as a sandbox. I will let people edit as they please. (However, I did not edit "without blinking an eye" -- I noticed several edits before I reverted.) --Jprg1966 (talk) 06:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I get what you said. Logged in to prove I'm here. <3
For your information
Nobody seems to have brought your attention to this thread where your contribution is being discussed in relation to an open letter by Philip Roth about Wikipedia.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Edit Warring at Jimbo's page
Please be aware that edit warring, even one edit, can be a violation of Wikipedia policies. There's no obvious need for the comment to be removed, so unless you can provide an overriding justification for the removal, please leave it be. Thanks. -- Avanu (talk) 01:27, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
- This user was just blocked indefinitely for disruption and is a suspected sockpuppet. I would not have removed it otherwise. --Jprg1966 (talk) 01:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Please learn the definition of attack
before slinging around accusations. Thanks. 24.136.136.42 (talk) 05:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)