User talk:ChessMasta2

chessmasta #1 editor talk

Clean up your mess very quickly

One of your recent acts violates a WP policy. If you do not clean it up in 3 hours, I will ask to for discipline against you. You may have noticed that I am not making this easy for you - IMO you need to learn to read and think before you rush into trouble. --Philcha (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

• This is not exactly the way things are actually done around here, your input is welcome at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:Philcha. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

o yea, its you who is trouble making idiot, you reverted to 1871, so i dare you tell that, how smart were you, dont waste my space!

Your attitude is not exactly helping here. I don't know which of us you are calling an idiot, but that is a personal attack and not acceptable. Also, you can remove other user's comments from your talk page if you wish, but striking them out makes it look as though the editors who made them have retracted their statements, which they have not in this case, so I am undoing this refactor of our remarks. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bartłomiej Macieja. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Momo san ^Gespräch 03:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

im not, the other foreign user is waging war, read what i wrote, im innocent, yo! check history of the page, i warned him of 3rr and much more, he is vandal seewolf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChessMasta (talk • contribs)

I don't think you're getting the point, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. The page history proves you have done this the last 3 days along with another IP. Stop and talk it out on the Talk page before everyone involved is blocked for edit warring. Momo san ^Gespräch 03:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

question is do you get it? you dont want to keep articles correct? did you do what i told u? no, of course! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChessMasta (talk • contribs)

That is why you need to discuss it on the talk page and gain consensus, this edit warring should not have happened this way. I have warned the IP editors of their actions as well, this is why we have article talk pages in the first place. Momo san ^Gespräch 03:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

right, but vandal seewolf was not warned on his talk page,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Seewolf

when things went bad, he never used his name, again, instead i came out lookin bad, innocent one!

your warning on his IP has no effect on his account, it should, remember his name so he never advances here

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Adolf Anderssen

The ref at JSTOR looks interest, but I had to removed it because the format was invalid:

• Excluse the "cookie" parameter, as this makes JSTOR look for an session and then write an error message when cookie is not found.
• Don't use naked URLs as refs. I like citation templates as these do all the format automatically. Using citation templates looks complex, but there's a Javascript tool refTools that allows you to write values into form - see summary at User:Philcha#Tools. I suggest you enable refTools in your Preferences and then try it on the Morphy article at JSTOR (ref used at Adolf Anderssen). --Philcha (talk) 23:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

You mean link is interesting? Well, good to know you admitted my work is ok,it as building material u used!

Morphy world champion 1858-1860

I've been following your comments on anderssen page, it's safe to say Morphy played in 1860:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?page=15&pid=16002&eresult=

if kolisch did not play anderssen, due to retirement or not, morphy remains champ until somebody plays anderssen, second best player in the world, now number one for many more years.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.48.91.75 (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Morphy played some games until 1877, he is the second world champ after anderssen, then came zukertort third, steinitz 4th!

well chessmasta that makes sense, you did what you could, good job!keep up!

YOU ALWAYS PROVE EM WRONG LOLS! Hope u get better keyboards, u rule editors here so drule!

YOUR QUOTE CHESS IS VANITY IS VERY TRUE, JUST LIKE LOWLYWIKIPEDIA 100% NOGOOD LOL!!! wikipedia-watch.org 100% true!

GOOD, THE MORE BLOX, THE BETTA, LOL I LL HAVE 1000 MORE, NOBODY STOPS ME, BLOCKIN ME U THINK U GET SOMETHING O NO, I ONLY GET FUN CUZ U BLOCK OTHERS LOL!THANX4DAFUN more pls!