Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Line 64: Line 64:
:Doubleplus fuck off. -[[User:Roxy the dog|'''Roxy,''' <small>the dog</small>.]] [[User talk:Roxy the dog|'''wooF''']] 05:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
:Doubleplus fuck off. -[[User:Roxy the dog|'''Roxy,''' <small>the dog</small>.]] [[User talk:Roxy the dog|'''wooF''']] 05:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
::It has come to my attention that you have quite a history of harassment and incivility. Perhaps you would prefer some more peaceful mode of dispute resolution and collegial editing, rather than risk another block? [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 05:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
::It has come to my attention that you have quite a history of harassment and incivility. Perhaps you would prefer some more peaceful mode of dispute resolution and collegial editing, rather than risk another block? [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 05:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
::''Really'' fuck off. -[[User:Roxy the dog|'''Roxy,''' <small>the dog</small>.]] [[User talk:Roxy the dog|'''wooF''']] 05:06, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:06, 4 July 2019


Bugger this

Not worth it. I reserve the right to re-enter the fray if satisfactory resolution ensues. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 18:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I'm really pissed off that good faith wikipedians can be treated so shittily. It could happen to anybody. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 12:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HBD

Happy alien abduc.. birthday. —PaleoNeonate – 12:10, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's this chip under the skin of my neck that was placed when I was abducted by Aliens who poked and prodded me. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 12:13, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PaleoNeonate – 12:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Wikitam331 (talk) 13:47, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Templating user

My reason? I thought that they were disrupting the page (most notably on Pasta). I did not realize that the other edits were Good Faith edits. I normally reserve those templates for obvious vandals. Upon further reflection, it does seem that my templating of that user was a mistake. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I consider the subject closed. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 08:09, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco

I think you're right there. Thanks. --YILMAZ AHMAD (talk) 16:20, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As-Salaam-Alaikum. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 00:32, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at this article. I can find loads of recipes here[1] that don't need a thermometer. And Condensed milk is wrong to when it says " Condensed milk and sweetened condensed milk is also sometimes used in combination with clotted cream to make fudge in certain countries such as the United Kingdom." That might happen in the UK but I dubious about the clotted cream being that common. I just made fudge with condsnsed milk, chocolate, marshmallows and graham crackers using an American recipe. Here's a New York site whose grandmother made a similar fudge.[2] Please ping me if you respond. Doug Weller talk 16:49, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to respond here, and then check to see if I didn';t get a little irate on the subject of chocolate fudge at one time. I mean, who puts chocolate in fudge fior goodness sake. The confection you just made sounds delightful, btw. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 19:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you insulting me on the Fudge talk page? Doug Weller talk 19:41, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nonono, I'm not. I was joking, and apologise for the misunderstanding. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 19:46, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'll withdraw all of it. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 19:46, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, sorry I misunderstood you. The problem is others might not, especially those I warn for using talk pages as forums after I delete their post! Doug Weller talk 20:32, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for the welcome note, it is appreciated. Essayist1 (talk) 09:17, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was a bit passive/aggressive, but nevertheless. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 09:19, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

Information icon Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Swanmore College, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 04:56, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Get lost. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 04:58, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You need to abide by WP:V in citing sources. I have provided a citation for you, which was easily found in the actress' article. I don't know why it was too difficult for you to just furnish it in the first place, if you felt that she should be included in the list. Elizium23 (talk) 05:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Go away and learn WP:PAG -Roxy, the dog. wooF 05:01, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you realize that in your efforts to edit-war, you deleted a perfectly good citation and replaced it with {{citation needed}}? Elizium23 (talk) 05:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck off. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 05:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Swanmore College shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Elizium23 (talk) 05:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doubleplus fuck off. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 05:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It has come to my attention that you have quite a history of harassment and incivility. Perhaps you would prefer some more peaceful mode of dispute resolution and collegial editing, rather than risk another block? Elizium23 (talk) 05:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Really fuck off. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 05:06, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply