Jump to content

User talk:Nancyinthehouse/April-May 2013

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     April-May 2013   
All Pages:  ... (up to 100)


Nancyinthehouse, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi Nancyinthehouse! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WMSCOG 3O

Go to the page talk at the bottom. Superfly94 (talk) 19:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Nancyinthehouse - please note that adding information to a page is NOT disruptive editing, however deleting someone's additions without allowing proper discussion in the talk section, like you keep doing, IS. Please stop doing this. It is rude and arrogant behaviour to think that you are the only person permitted to make additions to this page. Now, I have already asked you to join in the 3O discussion on the WMSCOG page. Please do so or I will have to go to the next step to sort out this issue. Superfly94 (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


DO YOU NOT KNOW HOW TO TALK?????? If you want to go with your last edit then delete everything prior to 1985!! And, dammit, go to the article talk page and put in your argument for 3O! You've had more than enough time given that you've done a few edits since the 3O was started on the talk page. If it's not done by tomorrow morning I'll be reporting you to the admins for disruptive and biased editing Superfly94 (talk) 01:53, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see no personal attacks here. I am attacking your behaviour, not you. Even my previous comment, though heated is not a personal attack. Superfly94 (talk) 02:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your last edits to my grammar that you changed back, read it aloud. It just doesn't sound right. I write for a living so can you trust me on the grammar aspect? Also, the God the father/God the mother, according to the church website, whenever they refer to them Mother and Father are capitalised, which is why I changed it. I can't help but feel that you just automatically reverted my editing out of spite. I AM trying to make the page better, which is why I properly formatted the History list in accordance with popular writing guides and fixed the grammar. It did not change the meaning at all and there was no need to change it back. I am trying to work with you here but can't help feeling that I am hitting a brick wall. Superfly94 (talk) 02:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Superfly94. Attacking me, or attacking my behaviour, you are insulting me. I don't understand why you are including information that needs to be written in a separate article. I have not done any disruptive biased editing since all editings that I have made were from reliable sources. I tried to make the article as neutral as possible according to the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. What makes you angry? It just seems that you just have personal hatred towards this religious movement/messiah claimants. It doesn't seem to make sense if you just insulted me just because of my grammatical error. Because you have talked about including 1985, NCPCOG source and about the Columbia article. --Nancyinthehouse (talk) 02:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy, sorry about insulting you, but I was getting frustrated with what seemed like selfish and biased editing and the fact that you want others to use the talk page but you were conducting edits without doing so yourself. I will do my best to hold my temper and word things better in future. Now, as to having a controversy/criticism section, that does not make an article weight go one way or the other. If you were to look up any of the other religion pages you will see that they all have that section (even Buddhism) and might even have a full page dedicated to controversy/criticism (Catholicism). Also, I will be going through the main page again to sort out the grammar. Please trust me when I say that what it was before my grammar edit makes it very hard to understand. Superfly94 (talk) 14:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators Notified

Information icon Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding Continual Biased Editing. The discussion is about the topic Ahn Sahng-hong. Thank you.

Information icon Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding Continual Biased Editing. The discussion is about the topic World Mission Society Church of God. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.225.159.78 (talk) 18:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#World_Mission_Society_Church_of_God_article
Superfly94 (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at World Mission Society Church of God. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Bbb23 (talk) 11:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Leonora Carrington may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]