User talk:Samdacruel
Flying Ace[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. --lTopGunl (talk) 20:04, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- Huh? What do you mean? --Sam 02:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- I mean removal of cited content is vandalism. I've added the quotation as well. It doesn't matter what you can & cannot do in computer games, you are being ridiculous. --lTopGunl (talk) 09:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- That was a joke.I was implying that 5 kills in minute is absurd. --Sam 15:41, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Removing sourced content is not funny. It is widely published, an international publication included, that I included and quoted in the references. Your implication is completely baseless. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- It is simply impossible for a person to score 5 kills in a minute. --Sam 17:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Removing sourced content is not funny. It is widely published, an international publication included, that I included and quoted in the references. Your implication is completely baseless. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- That was a joke.I was implying that 5 kills in minute is absurd. --Sam 15:41, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- I mean removal of cited content is vandalism. I've added the quotation as well. It doesn't matter what you can & cannot do in computer games, you are being ridiculous. --lTopGunl (talk) 09:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Battle of France[edit]
I see that you have removed the "citation needed" template in the article "Battle of France" ([1]) with comment "It seems tactically obvious". I would like to note that it is not a sufficient reason for such removal. The problem is that this statement ("A determined attack by a fresh and large enough mechanised force might have cut the Panzers off and wiped them out."), taken at face value, while true, is irrelevant. Of course, a free extra Army Group would have defeated the Germans. And if the Allies had ten extra well supplied Army Groups, they would have won no matter what. I hope you will agree that under this interpretation this sentence is useless. Thus it has to be rewritten, saying something less abstract. And we do need a source for that. Finally, adding a good source never hurts (see Wikipedia:Verifiability and related pages for more details)... --Martynas Patasius (talk) 19:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Samdacruel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Samdacruel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)