Hi Oub, I've taken the liberty to move your talk page back to where it belongs (i.e., from User talk:Oub2 to User talk:Oub). Kind regards, —
mark✎16:36, 5 March 2006 (UTC)reply
I removed the paragraphs in question because speculating on how a director might have done it differently is non-encyclopedic and OR. Your points are interesting, and you may notice I kept the paragraph about there being no Passion narrative in the Gospels (moved it up into the "source material" section. Thanks for commenting - Her Pegship16:44, 27 April 2006 (UTC)reply
March 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Office Open XML. 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.
ScarianCall me Pat12:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Re:
Scarian thanks for your reaction. I have answered in detail on the talk page of OOXML, which I think is better suited for this dispute. I must also add a sad observation, since OOXML is a highly political subject, at the end of the month there will be a voting about it becoming an ISO standard and given the fact that according to various sites
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070123.gtmsft0123/BNStory/Technology/home microsoft looks for support of its case in a rather unconventional manner, one should be very careful.
Oub (
talk)
14:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC):reply
To be absolutely honest, I'm not interested in content disputes. You can take all of this to
WP:RfM. I'm more interested in the fact of keeping the articles safe and free from edit warring and non-reliable sources. I won't block hAl until he does something wrong.
ScarianCall me Pat 16:20, 10 March 2008 (ETC)
Re:
Scarian Well I understand but was afraid of it. (Actually I suspect but I don't have proofs that HAl uses different accounts) Now what precisely I have to do in order take that to
WP:RfM.
Oub (
talk)
17:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC):reply
[1] - That sort of editing behaviour contradicts what you are saying, friend. Please do not revert anymore on that contentious issue. I am obliged to give you another warning for edit warring. Please stop. Use discussion. Thank you. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
ScarianCall me Pat10:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Re:
Scarian Look you called for a break and we were discussing the issue, then suddenly
Warren popped up and deleted the entire section without contributing to the discussion. I explicitly complained about his behavior in your talk page before undoing the edit. To make it clear it is not the fact that this entire section was deleted was a bad solution, I would have even agreed with it, it was the fact that
Warren acted like this. That you give me the warning and not him, I find strange to say the least.
Oub (
talk)
10:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC):reply