User talk:Arcticdawg

Dear Arcticdawg,

I'm so pleased to see someone adding something about the Battle on Snowshoes. But you got it VERY, VERY wrong. I have corrected it, as you can see, authoritatively. Tim Todish has reviewed, offered comments, and given me two thumbs up.

Now, if you have something substantial and worth adding, I encourage you to add it -- as long as it is footnotted, because I will be verifying changes. Otherwise, I suggest you leave it alone. You are making changes that are not appropriate. You added to the See Also section a link to additional conflicts in Canada. This is not a conflict "IN" Canada so that link is not appropriate. This is an AMERICAN conflict WITH Canada. There is a difference.

Kind regards, Pvt. Chauncey

Where the Battle on Snowshoes took place

Dear Arcticdawg,

I see you have again added the link to more conflicts in Canada with this: (→See also - The battle occurred in Canada, New France so List of conficts in Canada is relevant)

Have you NOT YET read the article? And how can you possibly think this battle was in Canada? I They were both in New York. The first was at Crown Point, the second was just beside Lake George -- in AMERICA!!! READ THE HISTORY BOOKS (and please, NOT Burt Loescher) before you make another change!!

Kindly, Pvt. Chauncey Pvtchauncey 17:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'A Battle Fought on Snow Shoes'

Good day, You seem to think the book entitled A Battle Fought on Snow Shoes should be referenced with the title in lower case. First, I would question why any book would be referenced in lower case? But second, to show you that it REALLY is in initial caps, I have provided for you a scan of my original copy of the 1917 publication. You can see below that Mary Chochrane Rogers herself uses initial caps. Please don't change it to lower case any more.

Kind rgeards, Pvt. Chauncey

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pvtchauncey (talk • contribs) 13:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC). Pvtchauncey 17:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines

II recommend you take a look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Articles talkpages are not the place to attack the object of the article. Agathoclea 12:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to do with "truth". The article talk page is there to discuss the content and edits of the talkpage and not to write your own little essay of what you think of the object. Agathoclea 12:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now unblocked after my discussion with User:Doug Bell. I still believe that your edits were disruptive at the time, but as Doug pointed out the whole community is under stress at the moment. I hope that we can put that whole affair behind us soon. Please be careful in future. Agathoclea 09:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Essjay controversy

You're double citing. The Belfast article is already linked in the article. If you haven't already then I strongly recommend you read what's already in the article before you continue editing it. (→Netscott) 02:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you keep adding duplicate content. Would you kindly refrain from doing that? Thanks. (→Netscott) 00:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you reduce the amount of work that you oblige other editors to have to do and edit correctly? Don' t try to unload your work on others, that's lame. (→Netscott) 00:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a dick. (→Netscott) 00:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My last message about this. It is rather dickish of you to say something like "do some real work" when I have been editing on the article essentially non-stop since the 5th. Now, kindly get a clue and stop making extra work for other editors. (→Netscott) 00:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another, that's three seperate editors User:Jayzel68, User:Casey Abell and myself that have had to clean up after you lame edits. Stop the nonsense. (→Netscott) 01:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is Z D Net?

I'm not sure what you mean. The two links I personally deleted were:

Wolfson, Andrew (March 6, 2007). "Wikipedia editor who posed as professor is Ky. dropout". The Louisville Courier-Journal. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Elsworth, Catherine (March 7, 2007). "Fake Wikipedia prof altered 20,000 entries". Telegraph.co.uk.

Both were already linked to in the article. Regards, --Jayzel 03:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

A have a short attention span. What are you talking about? In any case don't worry, I never have personal problems. `'mikka 00:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny

I think I've just realized who you are. Got a case to build now. (→Netscott) 02:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this account is not long for the world. (→Netscott) 02:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]