User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2019-10
|
2004, 2005, 2006-01--2006-06, 2006-07--2006-10, 2006-10--2005-12, 2007-01--2007-06, 2007-07--2007-09, 2007-10--2007-12, 2008-01--2008-06, 2008-07--2008-09, 2008-10--2008-12, 2009-01--2009-03, 2009-04--2009-06, 2009-07--2009-09, 2009-10--2009-12, 2010-01, 2010-02, 2010-03, 2010-04, 2010-05, 2010-06, 2010-07, 2010-08, 2010-09, 2010-10, 2010-11, 2010-12, 2011-01, 2011-02, 2011-03, 2011-04, 2011-05, 2011-06, 2011-07, 2011-08, 2011-09, 2011-10, 2011-11, 2011-12, 2012-01, 2012-02, 2012-03, 2012-04, 2012-05, 2012-06, 2012-07, 2012-08, 2012-09, 2012-10, 2012-11, 2012-12, 2013-01, 2013-02, 2013-03, 2013-04, 2013-05, 2013-06, 2013-07, 2013-08, 2013-09, 2013-10, 2013-11, 2013-12, 2014-01, 2014-02, 2014-03, 2014-04, 2014-05, 2014-06, 2014-07, 2014-08, 2014-09, 2014-10, 2014-11, 2014-12, 2015-01, 2015-02, 2015-03, 2015-04, 2015-05, 2015-06, 2015-07, 2015-08, 2015-09, 2015-10, 2015-11, 2015-12, 2016-01, 2016-02, 2016-03, 2016-04, 2016-05, 2016-06, 2016-07, 2016-08, 2016-09, 2016-10, 2016-11, 2016-12, 2017-01, 2017-02, 2017-03, 2017-04, 2017-05, 2017-06, 2017-07, 2017-08, 2017-09, 2017-10, 2017-11, 2017-12, 2018-01, 2018-02, 2018-03, 2018-04, 2018-05, 2018-06, 2018-07, 2018-08, 2018-09, 2018-10, 2018-11, 2018-12, 2019-01, 2019-02, 2019-03, 2019-04, 2019-05, 2019-06, 2019-07, 2019-08, 2019-09, 2019-10, 2019-11, 2019-12, 2020-01, 2020-02, 2020-03, 2020-04, 2020-05, 2020-06, 2020-07, 2020-08, 2020-09, 2020-10, 2020-11, User Talk:Geo Swan/archive/list
A barnstar for you!
[edit]
|
The Special Barnstar |
| For saving Rolf Steiner. Bearian (talk) 19:56, 2 October 2019 (UTC) |
"Salahuddin (Bagram captive)" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Salahuddin (Bagram captive). Since you had some involvement with the Salahuddin (Bagram captive) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:50, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
The article Karnal (Afghan leader) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Source insufficient for a stand alone bio article.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mccapra (talk) 22:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
You undid my clearly explained reverts without bothering to think of a reason. The only motivation I can infer from your talk page post is that you wished to provoke me. If you have a reason to revert - a policy or guideline that you think applies - then you must state it when reverting. If you do not, then do not revert. 46.208.236.175 (talk) 17:13, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- 46.208.236.175, I did explain my reversion, at Talk:Steve Fossey. You had been edit-warring, elsewhere. Your edits were questionable, and poorly explained. Geo Swan (talk) 02:54, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- You explained nothing. Why lie? 46.208.236.175 (talk) 07:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- We are all fallible. I am fallible. You are fallible.
- You explained nothing. Why lie? 46.208.236.175 (talk) 07:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Your edit history, short as it is, is marked by edit-warring and inappropriate hostility. This is a valid reason to not place trust in your inadequate explanations. Your hostility strongly suggests you are unwilling or unable to acknowledge that you, too, are fallible. Geo Swan (talk) 07:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- If people undo my edits for no reason, dishonestly accuse me of vandalism, make personal attacks against me, etc etc, they will probably find me to react with hostility. If people point to a guideline or policy that they believe I haven't taken account of in my edits, and undo them with a valid explanation, they will obtain a different reaction. You clearly set out explicitly to provoke me; you picked a random article and undid my edits there for no reason. Guess what reaction that brings from any serious editor working hard to improve the encyclopaedia. 46.208.236.175 (talk) 08:25, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- I see you have indulged in a little bit more pointless reverting, making an article that I fixed once again violate the manual of style. Stop vandalising now. 46.208.236.175 (talk) 08:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- There are people who regard all questions or challenges as personal attacks, no matter how tactfully they are phrased. I encourage you to not be one of those people.
- Noting you have been edit warring is not a "lie", is not a personal attack, when you have, in fact, been edit-warring. Geo Swan (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Your edit history, short as it is, is marked by edit-warring and inappropriate hostility. This is a valid reason to not place trust in your inadequate explanations. Your hostility strongly suggests you are unwilling or unable to acknowledge that you, too, are fallible. Geo Swan (talk) 07:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
Fram III
[edit]Please stop pinging me, please stop discussing me, please stop following me around. Fram (talk) 07:56, 29 October 2019 (UTC)