User talk:Backbone of ancient greek armies

Welcome!

Hello, Backbone of ancient greek armies, 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! Backbone of ancient greek armies (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:Falcon8765 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Falcon8765 (talk) 23:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page User talk:ShakingSpirit has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. December21st2012Freak , (Wanna Chat?) 22:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop abusing warning or blocking templates. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Stop Abce2|TalkSign 22:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you abuse a warning or blocking template, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Stop now Abce2|TalkSign 22:13, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you abuse a warning or blocking template again, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Abce2|TalkSign 22:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will get you for your vandalism of the article. Htf is anyone going to find info about the single in the 1998 World Cup page? You are really being rather dull.
Also your comments re "abuse" of templates is absurd -I was merely pointing out where people had vandalised Wikipedia. Backbone of ancient greek armies (talk) 22:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do not make threats or you will be blocked longer.Abce2|TalkSign 22:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no dear, that wasn't a theats it was a personal insult. Clearly you are too slow to recognise the difference. Why don't you go and play in the road? Backbone of ancient greek armies (talk) 22:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Either way both will get you a longer block. Stop. Abce2|TalkSign 22:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly, but i'll play the long game, and ensure that my valid content is not deleted in such arbitrary fashion.
Sorry. If you post something here, anyone can change it. And you also don't own the article. WP:OWNAbce2|TalkSign 22:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No but they can't delete it out of hand, can they? Backbone of ancient greek armies (talk) 22:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They can.Abce2|TalkSign 22:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No really they can't. If I went and vandalised Barack Obama by redirecting him into United States, I'd get another block. But I would be doing exactly what was just done to the page what I wrote. Backbone of ancient greek armies (talk) 22:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reboot

Good grief. Everybody calls everything vandalism, brains go into neutral and everyone acts like they're nothing more than support systems for adrenaline receptors. Hysteria ensues.

  1. Everybody stop calling BOAGA's edits vandalism; they aren't.
  2. BOAGA, stop calling their edits vandalism. They aren't. Vandalism means intentionally damaging the Encyclopedia.
  3. The redirect you folks keep edit warring (yes, you're all edit warring) to keep is a pretty useless redirect.
  4. Like it or not, BOAGA, if you start editing, and right after start flinging around personal attacks and vandalism templates, you're going to get blocked. You can wear it as a badge of honor if you want, but that seems a rather odd decision.
  5. There are ways to handle content disputes. None of you are following them.

Why not ignore any further trolling on your talk page, wait 24 hours (promising to continue personal attacks is guaranteed to get a block extension, not an unblock, so you ain't gonna get anything done today), then have a conversation about this on the talk page of the article? --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, you're being far too reasonable. Backbone of ancient greek armies (talk) 22:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Backbone, I have no knowledge of the article in question, and my original reversion of your edit was simply because you undid my bot's fixing of the double redirect calling it 'VANDALISM'. Putting vandal warning templates on my and the bot's talk page days after the fact, without any reference to what you're actually complaining about is singularly unhelpful. If you feel I or one of my bots have made an error, please come to me and say "you screwed up", and I'll work with you to fix it, but how you're handling the situation at the moment is simply antagonistic and feckless. ShakingSpirittalk 23:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: Following on from this, what was this[1] revert about? To quote from WP:CSD, The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance. The article does so, and so doesn't fall under A7 - PROD it or take it to AfD, but it's not a speedy. Regardless however, my gripe is that you simply added a {{delete}} tag with 'this is crap', and left a vandalism warning on my page, without attempting any dialog on either the article's talk page nor mine. It's good to be bold and IAR, but if you're going to make a change which flies in the face of consensus, atleast let people know what you're doing and why. ShakingSpirittalk 23:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize. Also I accidentally did not see the phrase "out of hand" in BOGA's comment, so my response was probaly wrong. Abce2|TalkSign 23:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of (How Does it Feel to Be) on Top of the World?

The article (How Does it Feel to Be) on Top of the World? has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unreferenced, unclear notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Falcon8765 (talk) 06:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]