User talk:TipPt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Please contact me

TipPt, can you please email me? Thank you. Jtpaladin 16:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category removal from your sandbox

When you copied the article into your sandbox, that page was added into all the categories that the article was in. I've fixed this problem by adding a leading colon to each of the categories, e.g. ":Category:Circumcision", which displays a link like Category:Circumcision, rather than just "Category:Circumcision", which actually adds the page to the category. Cheers! PaladinWhite 15:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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 which gains a consensus among editors. Jakew 18:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block

You were reported for 3RR violation on Circumcision, and I have blocked you for 48 hours. Since you have been blocked before for 3RR, it is clear that you need to take a hard look at our WP:3RR policy and edit accordingly. If you have disagreements over content, use collaboration on the Talk page, and if that fails, dispute resolution procedures to achieve your goals. Blind reverting will not get your views across, and may result in your being blocked for longer and longer periods. Thanks, Crum375 21:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Religious cabal"

Your characterization of those who disagree with you as a "religious cabal" is shameful and disgusting. Since you have previously mentioned my name specifically in this context, I take very deep personal offense at this. You know nothing of my religious beliefs or lack thereof, and your attempts to discuss what you believe my beliefs to be violate all norms of civilty.

I demand an immediate apology for your comments. They are utterly beyond the pale. Nandesuka 15:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for anything I have said that may be interpreted as disparaging to Jews or yourself. My concern is with the cabal and it's actions which grossly misrepresent facts and history. I do not think the Cabal represents any particular religion, let alone Jews.
Upon request, I will show you where your edits have forwarded the Cabal's evidenced goal of misrepresentation or omission of facts.TipPt 15:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
If you do not understand how accusing your fellow editors of being part of a "religious cabal" — your exact words — is a gross failure of civility on your part, then you are not fit to be an editor here. Unless you are prepared to recognize this and deeply and honestly apologize, without any attempts to explain how calling me a member of a "religious cabal" is somehow OK, I will undertake the appropriate next steps in the dispute resolution process. Nandesuka 15:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I honestly apologize, and I will desist in listing potential members.TipPt 16:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to request

Hello, you requested some assistance on my talk page regarding an editing conflict in Circumcision and related topics. Usually the best way to try and resolve these kinds of difficult situations is to work with the editors you disagree with and try to come up with a solution that all can agree to. Try discussing it on the talk page, or the talk pages of the users in question. If you feel that isn't going anywhere, take a look at our dispute resolution guidelines for some additional resources.

Also, as a friendly word of advise, you might want to refrain from characterizing other editors as members of a "cabal". Check our guidelines on civility and avoiding personal attacks. As good intentioned as your words may be, it is important to assume good faith and always give other editors the benefit of the doubt rather than accusing anyone of having an agenda.

I wish you luck in resolving your disputes. Happy editing! ɑʀкʏɑɴ 21:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please please please

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. The Evil Spartan 23:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your continued lack of civility

For someone who “honestly apologized” for inappropriate remarks about other editors, espcially vis-a-vis use of the term “cabal,” on July 15, your further posts, Tip, are indicative of your insincerity, and perhaps duplicitousness, as can be seen from

-- Avi 14:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The issue is content. The circumcision article is not factual in it's omission of highly pertinent facts, it's emphasis on relatively irrelevant information, and it's gross misrepresentations of fact.
My apology was to Nand, who I really don't know much about; so that's appropriate and done. She is a frequent participant the topic.
Avi, Thank you for finding those statements (which will stop) above, since they tend to document problems.
I won't raise the related issues again, and will have a concise list of topic problems in about a week.TipPt 19:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edwardsville

Thank you! When I saw the lock symbol, I foolishly thought that it meant I could not edit. (I'm a little new to Wikipedia!).

Alas, I have to leave for Australia tomorrow, but I will do what I can.

Thank you for fighting to protect children.

Edwardsville 18:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I just added the policy statements of the major medical associations to the intorduction section. They were immediately removed and if I understand the history page, they were immediately removed by Jakew. How do I report him for vandalism?

Edwardsville 18:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi there! I've been away for a while and only just got your last message. Thank you for continuing to fight for the truth. The dishonesty of those who have been vandalising the page is simply amazing.

[edit] Welcome back to the circumcision discussion

I look forward to your continued participation at Talk:Circumcision. I would like to suggest, though, that you avoid words like "cabal" and "honest", or similar ideas, but really assume good faith and try to work together with all the other people. To me, a written thing can be true or false but can't really be "honest" or "dishonest", so when you use the word "honest" it looks as if it might be implying that some other editors were not honest, which would violate WP:NPA. So, if you use the word please clarify exactly what you mean every time you use it so that that interpretation won't be there. We all need to help each other keep a cool head on that page. Remember to talk about article content, not about editors. Looking forward to seeing what you have to say and how we'll all reach consensus when your point of view is included in the mix. --Coppertwig 23:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I also want to welcome you back to the discussion. Please continue to work to get the truth out there. I'm sick of quotes from major medical associations being removed even when they are cited directly to the page of the medical association in question, simply because they don't support circumcision.

Edwardsville 12:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)