This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Roux(talk | contribs) at 21:58, 7 July 2012(→Okay, I get it.: Here's a little hint: stop accusing people of being angry when they're not, unless what you are trying to do is make them angry). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:58, 7 July 2012 by Roux(talk | contribs)(→Okay, I get it.: Here's a little hint: stop accusing people of being angry when they're not, unless what you are trying to do is make them angry)
I am pleased that you reverted from 'that' to 'which' on the Battle of Waterloo article. The spurious convention, often slavishly applied in the USA, insisting that 'which' is only used in conjuction with a comma is stifling good expression in English. I particularly despise journal editors/proofreaders who change my use of 'which' to 'that'. Urselius (talk) 07:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. It's something that always annoys me ;) → ROUX₪ 21:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I get it.
Enough is enough. I realize you are angry about the article, fine. But posting to intervene on other communications which do not concern you IS harassment. Please do stop. This is getting ridiculous.Keystoneridin (speak) 21:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is categorically not harassment to correct the false information you are providing to other editors. → ROUX₪ 21:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How can you be sure that I am providing "false" information? Up to this point, I have made all good edits on Wikipedia. There is no guideline that says I can, or cannot give a class on how to do the essentials of Wikipedia. Is it possible for you to just cool down for a while? In addition, albeit a very childish way, I would like to thank you for finding the errors on the article that I created. I would have appreciated a more adult level conversation, adult meaning someone of age 18 or older(I live in the U.S.). But either way, thank you for your contributions. I appreciate your hard work and your candor. Just please cool off a little before intervening in what you may perceive as "incorrect" information. Good day to you!Keystoneridin (speak) 21:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did you not read what I posted on your talkpage? I outlined quite precisely how and why what you were saying was false. The rest of your passive-aggressive nonsense I shall ignore. → ROUX₪ 21:57, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
