User talk:Njavallil/Archive 2
Copyright
[edit]You tagged Vytenis Lipkevičius (born 1989) as a copyvio. It couldn't be, as it was on Wikipedia! I deleted it as A10 - article duplicating another (Vytenis Lipkevičius) (which I can't see being very notable anyway...). Peridon (talk) 12:48, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Fraktur
[edit]The article page "Fraktur" used to be located as "Fraktur (script)", however the talk page of that article remains at Talk:Fraktur (script), because a page move has been messed up, so I was about to correct said link. Please look after *what* you revert rather than simply erasing IP edits, just because they are IP edits. Have a nice day.89.150.160.26 (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't know why you would characterize my edit to hadron as vandalism. It clearly does not meet Wikipedia's definition of vandalism (WP:V). Please read the edit summary and have a look at the contributions of Walterpfeifer (talk · contribs) who I reverted. 173.62.218.165 (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Vandalism?
[edit]Why did you revert one of my edits and label it vandalism?ElKevbo (talk) 06:09, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit]
Hi there. Your request for rollback was declined, and canvassing other admins probably isn't going to change that. Just keep reverting vandalism, get some more experience, and request it again in a week or two. Just be careful, I noticed a couple of edits you reverted that weren't vandalism. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Swarm X11|11|11 00:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Queen of the South F.C. League History
[edit]Hi,
Reply added on my talk page.
Socheid (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi again,
You have just added this below to my talk page. Politely and respectfully, what are you on about re 'joke edits'? I'm going to approach someone else to try to bring some sense to this as your update below couldn't be further from the truth. Socheid (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to User:Njavallil. Readers looking for accurate information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write practically anything you want. Please see the page to see the reasons. --Njavallil ...Talk 2 Me 18:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi again,
I've just requested input from User talk:John
Rgds, Socheid (talk) 18:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi again,
As per prev question that I asked in response to your original point, can you spell out exactly what your concern is with the page in question please? That would optimise the probability of me giving you a suitable response to your point.
Rgds, Socheid (talk) 18:48, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi once more,
I read what your original posting referred me to immediately after your original posting. I was uncertain having read that posting, hence why I respectfully requested your help by asking for clarification.
I'm not sure what you think I am up to here. Nor am I am I sure of what your agenda is based on what I politely feel seem to be less than constructive responses to the replies I have given to you. I would have been more than happy to work constructively with you. However its maybe a good to sit back and wait for the independent opinion that I have requested. That being the case I won't add any further responses until after John has had an opportunity to reply.
Rgds, Socheid (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
My edit to the article was to remove Primary Source commentary. That edit is covered underWP:Primary, as I noted in my edit summary. Am I mis-reading this? Thanks. 65.111.247.162 (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2011 (UTC)