Difference between revisions of "User talk:Genedoug"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Conservative (talk | contribs) (New page: Please review the conservapedia commandments: http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Commandments Please note the 90/10 rule. This is a friendly warning from a Conservapedia Admin. ~...) |
(That was fast, and for what?) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Please review the conservapedia commandments: http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Commandments Please note the 90/10 rule. This is a friendly warning from a Conservapedia Admin. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:50, 1 September 2007 (EDT) | Please review the conservapedia commandments: http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Commandments Please note the 90/10 rule. This is a friendly warning from a Conservapedia Admin. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:50, 1 September 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : If I may so bold as to point out, this user has made 3 edits to talk pages that add content, and 2 changes that clean up what was typed (signature and typos). My comments in ''italics''. | ||
| + | * 13:53, 1 September 2007 ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:BCE&diff=prev&oldid=284207]) m Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- ''Two paragraphs added'' | ||
| + | * 13:46, 1 September 2007 ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:BCE&diff=prev&oldid=284200]) Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- ''Fixing the text previously submitted'' | ||
| + | * 13:45, 1 September 2007 ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:BCE&diff=prev&oldid=284197]) Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- ''Adding sig to text previously submitted'' | ||
| + | * 13:43, 1 September 2007 ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:BCE&diff=prev&oldid=284195]) m Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- ''Adding another thought to material previously submitted'' | ||
| + | * 13:41, 1 September 2007 ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:BCE&diff=prev&oldid=284194]) m Talk:BCE (→BCE - replied to a statement.) -- ''Original content added'' | ||
| + | : Is there enough time between the warning at 13:50 and the block at 13:57? Is adding two comments to a talk page even enough to get on the 90/10 rule? --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 14:06, 1 September 2007 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 18:06, September 1, 2007
Please review the conservapedia commandments: http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Commandments Please note the 90/10 rule. This is a friendly warning from a Conservapedia Admin. Conservative 13:50, 1 September 2007 (EDT)
- If I may so bold as to point out, this user has made 3 edits to talk pages that add content, and 2 changes that clean up what was typed (signature and typos). My comments in italics.
- 13:53, 1 September 2007 ([1]) m Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- Two paragraphs added
- 13:46, 1 September 2007 ([2]) Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- Fixing the text previously submitted
- 13:45, 1 September 2007 ([3]) Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- Adding sig to text previously submitted
- 13:43, 1 September 2007 ([4]) m Talk:BCE (→BCE) -- Adding another thought to material previously submitted
- 13:41, 1 September 2007 ([5]) m Talk:BCE (→BCE - replied to a statement.) -- Original content added
- Is there enough time between the warning at 13:50 and the block at 13:57? Is adding two comments to a talk page even enough to get on the 90/10 rule? --Rutm 14:06, 1 September 2007 (EDT)