User talk:PSRuckman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Archiving

Please don't blank your page. Archiving would be much better. JoshuaZ 04:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I looking for instructions on that right now - as I have already indicated elsewhere. Meanwhile, take care of the very poor editing that is going on on the Peter Ruckman page you guys so love lording over. "Then unaccredited institution?" Come on. We can write better than that can't we? And where is the civility rebuke for the weasel comment? The police are asleep. By the way, lead me to Arbusto's archive while you are at it. PSRuckman

Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page should tell you how to archive. Arbustoo seems not have needed to archive yet. JoshuaZ 04:47, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Isn't that interesting. And someone once described Arbusto as a "known quantity." Hilarious. PSRuckman

He frequently talks about articles on the article talk pages and on other user talk pages, as well as taking part in other Wikipedia space discussions (such as deletion discussion). By the way, your Archive link does not seem to be working. Do you want me to help archive things for you? JoshuaZ 04:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

It seems to be working great. Hit refresh on your browser. PSRuckman

If you noticed, section headings and formatting have all run together, making it very hard to read. JoshuaZ 05:00, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Sure I did. But that is another issue for another day. It is archived. Have you addressed that poor English yet? PSRuckman

Considering it will take me two seconds to fix the formatting, it might as well be dealt with now. As for poor English, it is again helpful if you tell me precisely which issues you are talking about. I'm not a mind reader. JoshuaZ 05:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate your interest and effort. Per usual, I explained my "issue" with great clairity (above) that cannot really be improved upon ... Meanwhile, take care of the very poor editing that is going on on the Peter Ruckman page you guys so love lording over. "Then unaccredited institution?" Come on. We can write better than that can't we? PSRuckman

Ok, I think the reason why it kept getting reverted was because on the editing page "an" is right before the word "school" but the word school doesn't show up in the displayed page. That should take care of that. Should I interpret your above remark as permission to reformat your archive? JoshuaZ 05:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

You can help yourself with my archive. I am not certain what your explanation means - for the other thing - but I will try to understand it. Maybe it will explain why Arbusto seems to have insisted on some of the most mindless edits. I am pretty sure he has already rejected 1. "then - and now - an unaccredited school" 2. "an unaccredited school" (your version) and 3. "then an unaccredited school" ... all of which are better than the ugly looking "then unaccredited school." Maybe he will accept your edit because it is your. Punch line is that the edits he has rejected favor his bias with respect to the school's status. On the other hand, he did seek to have the page removed altogether and may just be content to edit it poorly. PSRuckman

Ok, I've fixed the archive formatting. For future reference when you copy and paste from a non-edit screen it doesn't keep most of the formatting. If you want to copy and paste with formatting click on "edit" and then copy/cut the text from the edit screen. JoshuaZ 19:09, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[1|Archive 1]