Jump to content

User talk:PDAWSON3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Spiro Agnew. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. --Strothra 22:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have only just seen this. Shameless hypocrisy from Strothra - who may have been the anonymous editor who blanked the page in February. Strothra opened up an edit war and then sent a pre-emptive 3rr warning. Anyway, he/she does not appear to exist on Wikipedia any more. No tears from me. PDAWSON3 (talk) 22:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sytten

[edit]

Hi, Pdawson3. I noticed you added a comment by a reviewer to the Sytten article. It will need to have the reviewer's name as well as a cited source. It would be great if you could add that. Cheers CactusWriter | needles 18:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks, CactusWriter. You're obviously right, but it was more than 40 years ago and I have no access to the source these days. I just remember it as a witty comment. If lack of source leads to the comment's deletion, I shall quite understand. PDAWSON3 (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I didn't realize you were quoting from memory. It's a shame because it could be a good comment to include. Was there a particular newspaper you read back then? If so, there could be a possibility of doing an archive search. Just a thought. Otherwise, yes, I'm afraid that a quote like that can't remain without sourcing. CactusWriter | needles 20:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, I was an avid film buff in those days and I read reviews from wherever I could find them. A friend just pointed out that the joke is (i) obvious and (ii) matches a earlier joke in Get Smart, where Max (Agent 86) is discussing Agent 43 with Agent 99, who says "you're worth two 43s, 86.". I'll remove the comment myself.PDAWSON3 (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

[edit]

Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits. Per Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. The rule of thumb is that only vandalism/test reversions or edits consisting solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modifying content should be flagged as "minor". Thank you. BaronLarf 07:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]