User talk:67.165.163.114

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, 67.165.163.114, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

 — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 03:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Fahrenheit 911

I liked your addition to 9/11. It was reverted, and I put it back. By the way, are you familiar with WP:3RR ?  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 03:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It was not reverted BY ME... see the history of the page.  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 03:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You are right! (apt and undeniable). By the way, when you leave a message on any talk page, you are supposed to sign it using ~~~~ (you can also use the tenth edit button in the edit screen for that)  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 03:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Sorry I thought You reverted me.03:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)GUAM

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on September 11, 2001 attacks. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 04:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 04:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Register

I noticed while looking through the history of September 11, 2001 attacks that the revert I made was an edit by an IP which was not yours. Still, you charged that I had reverted you, leading me to believe that if you are indeed the same person, then you are using a dynamic IP address. In order to avoid such confusion in the future, I would strongly suggest that you register for an account on Wikipedia. It's quick, free, anonymous, and makes it far easier to interact with other editors. Thank you for your time. ~ S0CO(talk|contribs) 05:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The reason I prefer not to engage in debate here, as previously noted, is because it seems you are using a dynamic IP. If I post here, it's quite possible that you will not even see it, because by then your computer may be using a different address. Anyway, the reason (also previously noted) why I strongly recommend registering for an account is because it would ensure that we were always talking to the same person. I saw that the edit of yours I reverted was not submitted by this IP address, meaning one of two things:
  • It was not posted by you, or
  • It was posted by you while your machine was using a different address, which would mean you have already violated WP:3RR on the 9/11 page.
It makes things easier for everyone to communicate if identities are kept consistent. Besides, with an account you wouldn't be restricted from editing semi-protected articles. ~ S0CO(talk|contribs) 05:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] end edit war?

Hi GUAM,

I hope you realize that no-one benefits from an edit war, ok? Would you please reply at Talk:9/11#March 11 edit war on Fahrenheit 9/11?  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 13:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, you're great !

 — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 00:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] wikiquette

Dear GUAM,

I think it is important to be as consise as possible on article talk pages. When 10 editors give an example, and others react, we have 100 discussions which are distracting from the thing it all started with. I want to limit my contributions to that which is directly relevant to the article, and therefore to all. I want to discuss all else on the personal editor's own talkpage. That keeps discussion focussed.  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 04:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Right, I guess this is my talk page. Where's yours? Or more concisely, which section? I feel very strongly about the "Motive" and "Responsibility" sections, Xiutwel, because it is the cornerstone, I think, of it all. If I, WE, can succeed in getting the "Motives" and "Responsibility" sections to reflect that the United States Government i.e. Congress, Senate, and Cabinet, are responsible for the attacks because of their acknowledged agreement to, or at least complacency in military juntas and various other murderous intervention, then that will be a giant step toward objectivity.

Or not. ~ S0CO(talk|contribs) 18:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] request your input in a consensus survey re 9/11

Dear 67.165.163.114,

At Talk:9/11#defining consensus I started a survey to get a better picture on how editor's opinions are varying with respect to the following statement:

"The current form of the 9/11 article is at odds with the WP:NPOV policy, and the proposed inclusion of the fact that Michael Meacher alleges the US government of willfully not preventing the attacks, would make the article better, in stead of worse.

I would appreciate it when you could take a look.  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 17:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)