User talk:Yano
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Djokovic name change
Yes, rather. They have a right to their opinion, but I do have a problem with them trying to impose it on the English Wikipedia. Unfortunately the problem is not limited to this subject or this nationality. :-( *sigh* I think mediation is probably a good idea. I'm not sure how to get that started, though, even though I've been here for a while. --Tkynerd 01:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Isn't plotting against users fun and exciting? ;-) --GOD OF JUSTICE 04:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- BTW, I'm not of Serbian nationality, merely a citizen. --GOD OF JUSTICE 05:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hey Yano, thanks for taking the initiative on getting this into mediation. --Tkynerd 01:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removing additional issues
It is not OK to remove additional issues from the mediation page, if one of the involved parties considers the issues to be directly connected to the issue at hand, none of the involved parties are allowed to remove it, only add things, and the mediation committee will decide on whether it has or hasn't got connections. Thank you, --GOD OF JUSTICE 18:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
WP:Mediation says nothing about removing additional issues. What do you base your conclusion that removing additional issues is "not OK" on? In any case, I will not delete them again.-- Yano 18:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)- Never mind. I see where it says not modify the Additional Issues. My apologies. -- Yano 19:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Request for Mediation
 |
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Novak Đoković.
|
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
[edit] You are starting a revert war
I see you're ignoring the principles of Wikipedia, but I urge you not to ignore the 3rd revert rule: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period. A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time. Any editor who breaches the rule may be blocked from editing for up to 24 hours in the first instance, and longer for repeated or aggravated violations." I strongly suggest that you stop reverting until the editors of Wikipedia have come to a consensus, unless you have nothing against being blocked from editing. Thank you. --GOD OF JUSTICE 03:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I'm not edit-warring...
...although I did revert twice, but that's my limit. I think it's funny that the users in question (1) appear to be working in concert, and (2) don't seem to be able to tell the difference between you and me. HA! I did miss the point about not reinstating the prod tag, sorry about that. --Tkynerd 04:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry -- by "I'm not edit-warring," what I meant was, "I have no intention of edit-warring." I'm sorry that wasn't clear. And thank you for the compliment. --Tkynerd 05:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. This is really a ridiculous discussion, not because the issue is ridiculous (as I posted on the talk page earlier today when someone asked the "what would your friends think?" question), but because policy is really sufficiently clear and is being ignored to suit some users. I'm sorry you feel as you do, but I certainly can't say I blame you. --Tkynerd 23:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Arbcom request submitted
I've opened a case at this location. Orderinchaos 08:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
