User talk:Chido6d

Mediation case

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Passive smoking, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. MastCell ^Talk 04:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Italic text[reply]

yo its mickey

Sup Chido, look like they bit on mediation this time, I'm really glad you've been fighting hard on this. I hope you join the official fight, its time to assert scientific integrity over advocacy. 69.181.208.181

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on passive smoking. 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 which gains a consensus among editors. Note you also appear to be editing from 71.72.217.102 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). MastCell ^Talk 05:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility & personal attacks - please stop

I'd ask you to stop making personal attacks against me on talk pages, as you have at Talk:Passive smoking, particularly in your revision of 21:34, 24 July 2007, in which you say ":If you would get the goop out of your eyes and read my post" and your revision of 00:05, 25 July 2007, in which you say "The bold type wasn't for emphasis, it was to help you read."

Suggesting that I can't read doesn't help your arguments, is openly insulting, and is against WP:Civility - which I strongly advise you to go and read. Nmg20 14:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop

You really need to stop. You've incessantly implied that any content differences we have on passive smoking are motivated by a desire, on my part, to "suppress" information or intentionally mislead. Your latest accusations are that I/we are intentionally suppressing the name of the judge involved in USA v. Philip Morris, to hide the fact that she's an "ultra-liberal Clintonite". That's ridiculous, given the number of edit summaries I've included along the lines of "Add Kessler quote", not to mention the fact that User:Dessources, who initially provided the source, always mentions the judge by name. Then you add this to the mediation, implying that we're the ones failing to assume good faith, if I interpret correctly. You're undermining your credibility at this point, and I'd ask you to stop. MastCell ^Talk 18:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry to hear about your loss. I know we argue about things on here, but life is bigger than that. You have my sincere condolences. I hope you don't mind my saying so here. MastCell ^Talk 03:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

arbitration

I cant find the link to your request, but I'm generally down. Could you send me a link? Mickeyklein 07:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Passive smoking

Please seek consensus before making any further edits to this article. Your disruptive pursuit of a single-purpose POV is not helping the project. The unequivocal rejection of your arbitration complaint ought to have made this clear. Perhaps you could contribute more usefully on some other topic. JQ 05:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tuff issue

Chido6d, I myself consider the political situation to have pretty entirely won out over science, in this case; cancer will be cured by the time this cycle of Prohibition recedes. IMO. But good luck.

I ought to add that wiki seems like the main more-or-less objective source for the opposing PoV, however, i.e. that the popular assumptions are at least over-stated.
You play go? I'm assuming that as a smoker, you aren't 6d in Shōrin-ryū :-)
I suggest making a user page, so that folks can click on your sig and then the Talk tab. Just a convenience. Pete St.John (talk) 19:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR and edit-warring

You're rapidly racking up the reverts on passive smoking. It should be clear, at this point, that you don't have consensus. While you've reverted 3 times in just over 24 hours and haven't broken the letter of 3RR, you're clearly violating its spirit. Given your extensive history, if you continue reverting I'm going to ask an outside admin to review your activity. MastCell ^Talk 04:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom elections

You need 150 mainspace edits to vote, which you don't have. Thanks This is a Secret ^account 03:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help - Edit War

Dessources and Yilloslime are currently attempting to undo two very small, perfectly reasonable changes of mine. A couple of like-minded folks are on my side, but we could use help. Please refresh yourself on the issues and get involved if you see fit.SonofFeanor (talk) 16:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh plz

Or did you not notice the whole SonofFeanor incident? You are the only one supporting the wording, multiple editors have said as much so plz stop. Soxwon (talk) 22:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]