Difference between revisions of "User talk:Order"

Revision as of 15:28, May 28, 2007

Just a note on your recent revert at Christianity; the vandal was User:Shortdog57, not Hojimachong. Tsumetai 07:56, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I know. My edit message 'reverted vandalism by shortdog; reverted to version by Hojimachong' was mangeled. If you click on Hojimachong in the history of Christianity you will get to shortdog. Not sure why this happend.

Point taken on European liberal parties. Have contributed minor point to discussion on liberal and applied a minor edit to the article.--AustinM 08:56, 12 March 2007 (EDT) Thanks for reverting the Christianity page. --TimSvendsen 20:49, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Warning: you posted a derogatory comment to my talk page after I warned someone else not to post further discussion about on that topic (Wikipedia's bias) there. Each content page has a talk page for postings comments. Another example of an inappropriate posting will result in the blocking of your account.--Aschlafly 14:30, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

You must be a communist. I PROVED to you that global warming is a myth by giving you a link! Why are you questioning it?! - Sauli 10:12, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

This comment just shows that you have no clue what communism means. You proved that you were able to google. --Order

*sniggers* --Liπus the Turbogeek^{(contact me)} 08:09, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Without the communist remark, my answer is: iirc, all you did is quote an article about a danish scientist, saying that global warming is overhyped, and that the way its there exist no reasonable definition of average global temperature. I actually think similar about it. Now your 'argument': First, he doesn't say that its not true, just that it is bad science (I wouldn't actually go that far). But the actual problem with your argument is, that a single researcher opposing it doesn't make it a myth. Just as little as a single researcher makes it a fact. User:Order 7 april, 00:50 (AEST)

Just so you know: I believe that your sig is broken. Geekman314^{(contact me)} 21:54, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

Hitler

To avoid even more discussion, could you add the citations to your excellent additions to the Putsch? --~ TerryK ^Talk2Me! 05:01, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for the attributions, good sir. --~ TerryK ^Talk2Me! 07:29, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Liberal

I didn't put anything back, in that thread. Look closely. --~ TerryK ^MyTalk 19:25, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

No, you didn't, Rob did. Sorry, if I did attribute it to the wrong person. User:Order 26 March.

German Homeschooling

I'll score that little debate as a big win to the Germans - well done! Makes up for the World Cup ;-) Ferret 07:50, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

• Well, we will see. ;-) --Sysop-TK _/MyTalk 08:01, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

• • Well, we already have. Ferret 17:06, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for your support with very well put arguments. --schifra 07:24, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

Censoring Talk pages?

TK, why did you revert the last comment by ResistanceFighter on the talk pages. I thought the Talk pages were for discussion, and I didn't expect that someone would revert comments. I'd expect you to reply to his comments, not remove them. User:Order May 21 11:40 (AEST)

Order, I have an old saying: "Caution! Be sure brain is engaged before putting mouth in operation!" The last comment there, FYI, on Fighter's talk page was from the user BrianCo, who was blocked for being a vandal, and ResistanceFighter was his sock. Now, instead of posting there, just to gain exposure for your sly little ad hominem attack on me, you could have sent an email or gotten me on IM, or even posted on my talk page. Now, I expect an apology. This bit of foolery is certainly not adult or professional. --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 08:30, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

 : What is sly and ad hominen about my question? It was a fairly neutral question about why a comment was removed. I saw that a comment got removed without comment. And I asked you why? You could have added the explanation that you gave now already when you removed the comment. It appeared, and not just to my brain, as if a comment was removed without giving a reason. And that was exactly what you did. And even if it was a sock puppet, I still can't see why you did remove the comment without giving a reason. Wouldn't the normal procedure be to block the sock puppet, and revert vandalism if it happend. User:Order May 25 User:Order May 25

• Normal on RW or WP, as you might have noticed by now, is not "normal" here, right? Sorry for the too hostile tone above, man, but doesn't change the answer. ;-) --Sysop-TK _/MyTalk 00:49, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

That's cool. You explained it well. User:Order May 27.

Hi Order, thanks for commenting the spin put on the paper about the higher minimum wage teenagers dropping out of school. You saved me the bother. The last time I commented on dubious interpretations of news articles or suchlike on the Main Page I was blocked for a month. Proceed with care;-). You might like pop round to my user page. TK requested I improve it. I hope you like it better than my old version. WhatIsG0ing0n 11:28, 28 May 2007 (EDT)