Difference between revisions of "User talk:Spielman"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Useful links
(→Warning: sneaky how?) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Warning== | ==Warning== | ||
Nice try with the sneaky edit to [[dog]]. We're not stupid, you know. [[User:Brenden|Brenden]] 15:53, 13 February 2013 (EST) | Nice try with the sneaky edit to [[dog]]. We're not stupid, you know. [[User:Brenden|Brenden]] 15:53, 13 February 2013 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I don't see the sneakiness. Are you under the mistaken impression that I authored that paragraph? I ''reverted'' [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Dog&diff=1024598&oldid=1024569 this edit] by [[User:MattyD]] which deleted a large section from the article [[dog]]. Under different circumstances, I might have given the other editor the benefit of the doubt, but MattyD has been permanently blocked and the deleted section had been stable for more than a year. Safest course of action was to revert. My [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Dog&diff=next&oldid=1024608 edit summary] accurately stated what I had done. I admit I didn't pay very close attention to the content after the first few sentences. It does get a bit strange at the end. [[User:Spielman|Spielman]] 23:29, 20 February 2013 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 04:29, February 21, 2013
Welcome!
Hello, Spielman, and welcome to Conservapedia!
We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.
At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!
Thanks for reading, Spielman!
brenden 22:13, 7 February 2013 (EST)
Warning
Nice try with the sneaky edit to dog. We're not stupid, you know. Brenden 15:53, 13 February 2013 (EST)
- I don't see the sneakiness. Are you under the mistaken impression that I authored that paragraph? I reverted this edit by User:MattyD which deleted a large section from the article dog. Under different circumstances, I might have given the other editor the benefit of the doubt, but MattyD has been permanently blocked and the deleted section had been stable for more than a year. Safest course of action was to revert. My edit summary accurately stated what I had done. I admit I didn't pay very close attention to the content after the first few sentences. It does get a bit strange at the end. Spielman 23:29, 20 February 2013 (EST)