Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:11, 3 December 2010

Welcome!

Edit summaries for your edits to List of U.S. presidential relatives

Please stop using silly edit summaries to your edits. Edit summaries are to be used to describe your edit, not to make Star Trek references. Thank you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:59, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Just a follow-up note to say that it is not that I disagree with your changes, but your edit summaries were not helpful. I incorrectly reverted your edits after misinterpreting your edit summaries. I undid my revert. Sorry about that. However, it would be better if you used helpful edit summaries like you have been doing before. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:10, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. The recent edit you made to List of U.S. presidential relatives has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Matthew Yeager (talk) 23:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you make personal attacks on other people, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Nlu (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

You are insulting our brains with your bullshit. That's what. Stop it. It's called disruption. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 23:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Just a short note here. Looking at both users talk pages, it's clear that Couch was not attacking anyone, however, I can see how it may have looked that way. I think we all should just take a deep breath and regroup! :) Couch, on a seperate note, when you leave messages on a talk page, you may want to have a short header, and then include the message below it. It just makes things look nicer, and may prevent other editors from thinking vandalism right away. --TwistOfCain 23:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Does stuff get done

I was about to reply, but the discussion was marked archived - which is great, and definitely the best thing. Couch, stuff does get done, as we know - the project is quite groovy. But most of it gets done by those of us who don't give a fuck. So...yeah...have a cup of tea, don't panic, etc. Talk to us, with this. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  23:45, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

I will lift this block, or any other administrator may do so, if you let us know you've taken seriously the warnings given and are here to make productive edits, not just waste time. Jonathunder (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

• Uh, wow. How did things get this out of hand. Could I ask that you look at my edits, and not at the crap coming in on my talk page from nasty people? Or atleast look at the stuff on my talk page from non-nasty people? Anything? Did you seriously look at my history before blocking me? This is baffling. Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) 00:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Unblocked

Following our discussion on the chat channel, I've unblocked your account. Please keep in mind the advice I gave you, and happy editing. If you should ever need more help, please feel free to drop by my talk page, put a {{helpme}} template on this page along with your question, or visit one of the other pages I mentioned. To admins: If you would like a log of the discussion we had, please email me here. The unblock channel does permit public logging. Hersfold 01:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

I see that you had a conversation with Hersfold about what happened. Things went a little sideways with it all. I wasn't offended by anything you said to me, though I agree with TwistOfCain that one could see how it could be interpreted that way. Having fun with edit summaries or section titles is fine from time to time (I've done both myself), but you have to careful sometimes with it as the humor might not be entirely clear to everybody. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)