User talk:Vipercat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Graal stuff and your review comment's
Hi, regards to the comments you made on my review. First off thanks for feed back. But also cna you read throuhg carefully what I have written bith on Daniels talk page and on the graal talk page. He move on advice is good advices(it worked for me!!) but not directed at Daniel in particular - more at the other users getting involved.
I'd appreciate it if you express your feelings about Daniel's attempts at his talk page to back up what I have already saide in support. ALthough I think he has already rejoined us - by reverting his userpage back to normal.
[edit] Who posted the above stuff?, and what is it talking about?
I do not know who posted the above comments, and I am not quite sure what they are referring to? I am willing to look at this Graal topic with an open mind and fairness. But I do not feel that niether UGCC or GraalOnline should have total control over a topic, but rather a fair, and unbiased 3rd party with extensive research and reviews into every aspect of this topic. I do not hate either Unixmad or UGCC, despite how they have acted, but I do strongly disagree with many of their actions and feel they are all going in the wrong directions. I may also suggest that differences in languages and communications may have added misunderstandings to the topics. Vipercat 08:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry I posted that crappy unsigned comment :D It was in response to this [1] comment you made on my editor review - but I was in a rush and failed to explain myself :D. When I posted my note on the Graal article I did so because I noticed daniel had become upset with the outcome of the mediation case and was threatening to leave or vandalise wikipedia, in response I was suggesting everyone calm down and leave the article for a bit (seeing as it is protected and no-one can have control of it for the moment) and come back when the air had cleared. I also sent daniel and email (you can see the transcript on his talk page archive) asking him to reconsider and come back. Which he did and is just as successful as before as an editor :D
- Sorry about the messy comment above it is not my normal style but I was in a rush trying to email daniel at the time (plus I was at work too!!!) so it turned out bad. --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 08:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for the clarification.
I misunderstood what you meant back then and had even forgot about that, I am glad everyone could calm down over the issue. I actually thought you were the user graal_unixmad posting that unsigned comment, the clarification clears up a lot. I can understand how being passionate over issues can get people emotional or even angry, especially when threatened or attacked on the issue. Vipercat 13:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah it's very true, people do get worked up and rightly so. Where would we be without passion :D Hopefully graal_unixmad can evantually be convinced though of the real purpose of wikipedia - to write neutral information articles - however I doubt it, which is a shame. See you around --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 13:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
