User talk:Neatsfoot

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Neatsfoot! Thank you for your contributions. I am Green Giant and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Green Giant (talk) 22:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

comment on Floquenbeam's talk

[1] Removed your comment, you must have got it wrong, because supporter of Aam Aadmi Party or Anna Hazare are not any religious activists. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK, thanks, I guess I misunderstood. Neatsfoot (talk) 17:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced it with a more vague comment - I don't want to blame the wrong people. Neatsfoot (talk) 17:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My edit of your user page

I edited your user page so it would redirect to your talkpage because there is nothing on it! Sorry if it offended you! Luxure (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Could you stop posting at User talk:Lukejordan02? You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. PhilKnight (talk) 12:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No - if you think I'm factually incorrect about something, please feel free to explain it to me. Neatsfoot (talk) 12:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are giving unsolicited advice to admins which plainly contradicts WP:Blocking policy, specifically "Except in cases of unambiguous error or significant change in circumstances dealing with the reason for blocking, administrators should avoid unblocking users without first attempting to contact the blocking administrator to discuss the matter. If the blocking administrator is not available, or if the administrators cannot come to an agreement, then a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard is recommended." PhilKnight (talk) 12:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But there have been attempts to contact the blocking admin, which were successful, and he made it clear he would accept an unblock if there is a consensus - AND the consensus makes it clear that there was an ~~unambiguous~~ error. Neatsfoot (talk) 12:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC) (strike "unambiguous" - that would be claiming too much)[reply]

Oh, and what's this "unsolicited" business? Are mere mortals like me not allowed to speak unless first spoken to? Neatsfoot (talk) 12:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't appreciate being referred to as an old hen, and I didn't ask for your advice. PhilKnight (talk) 13:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the "old hen" thing was excessive, and I apologize for that. But I notice you are not responding to the actual content of my response above - so please don't tell me I'm wrong and then just ignore me when I show you I am not. And you don't get to shut me up by telling me you didn't ask for my advice - I have as much right as you to join in any administration-related discussion I please, without being invited by you, and admins *do not* get to rule on who can and cannot speak. Neatsfoot (talk) 13:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion on User talk:Lukejordan02 is now getting somewhere, and hopefully the unblock requirements can be finalized. I accept your apology, but nonetheless I consider your earlier remarks to be clueless. PhilKnight (talk) 14:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You need to substantiate your claim of cluelessness rather than just repeating it - I'm open to constructive criticism, but you have not yet offered any that I have not countered. If my countering of your argument is wrong, please explain why. Neatsfoot (talk) 14:06, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not interested in arguing with you. I'm just asking that you stop posting at User talk:Lukejordan02, because you aren't helping. PhilKnight (talk) 14:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll post wherever I please, and you have no right to demand otherwise. Neatsfoot (talk) 14:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that I'm open to persuasion if you want me to stop posting somewhere, but "I'm not interested in arguing with you" is not it. Neatsfoot (talk) 14:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I see on your user page the the following quote:

“

It's good to let your ego be punctured once in a while. Most of us, after several years and tens of thousands of edits, start to put a lot of our egos into our work here, more than we originally either intended or anticipated. While it's natural for this to happen, the unintended consequences include feelings of ownership over one's contributions and a quickness to react in poor faith, and even with arrogance. Someone reverted your edits with a sarcastic edit summary? Let it go. Someone called you a bad name somewhere? Don't retaliate. Let it go. While it hurts at first to let these things go, being able to do so is the true test of strength and maturity. You only gain in the long run. Retaliating not only brings you discredit, but it increases your anger, and corresponding risk of over-reaction, as the number of related provocations rises. (Antandrus, January 2007)

”

I think that's excellent, and I thank you for sharing it. Neatsfoot (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antandrus is brilliant... Carrite (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

You're the first editor since the ones on Roy Halladay (Talk:Roy_Halladay#Reverting_edits_by_banned_user) to vouch for the quality of my edits, as oppose to pushing to have me blocked and reverted my contributions over sockpuppetry while ignoring the content of my edits. Its really touching and greatly appreciated. Could you also have a look at the Apple Store article and see if that is an okay edit ? BenefactorDubsta (talk) 04:02, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I don't think asking other people to evaluate your edits is the best way to proceed. It seems to me that there is a "rules for rules sake" culture here, and if an account is thought to be a sock of a blocked account then people will revert its edits without any regard to their merits - and I'm not going to get involved in any edit warring over such things. I suggest the best thing to do is open an unblock request at your original account, and be prepared to perform the appropriate rituals of contrition. Neatsfoot (talk) 08:35, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Neatsfoot. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
Message added 12:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

De728631 (talk) 12:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation

Thanks for your edit at Derren Brown. Your edit was quite appropriate but I just though I'd let you know that it's not a matter of British punctuation. MOS:LQ applies regardless of the variety of English. Anyway, keep up the good work. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:10, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info and the link - as a Brit, it's nice to know that the British way is considered "logical" ;-) Neatsfoot (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the language is called "English", not "Ammerykan." --AussieLegend (✉) 10:50, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed :-) Neatsfoot (talk) 11:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page remark

While I often feel tempted to say something like that, we do prefer a bit more restraint... Anyway, you got it the wrong way round. They should go away and grow up rather than cause here all the problems that growing up entails and then go away. Peridon (talk) 11:18, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, yes, you're right - but after a couple of hours of vandal-fighting, I felt I needed that. And I feel much better now :-) Neatsfoot (talk) 11:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you specify the source

enough

levente 2-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Levente_2