Datasets:

RuyuanWan

/

Politeness_Disagreement

like 0

Yes, the "licking my balls" thing. Why am I not surprised that that was his work too?

So you deny you did anything wrong Jason? And we're all Nazi's persecuting you, Itake and Uncle Davey?

That said, why remove any mention of the way the incomplete? This seems especially relevant because the American production ended in the same way, with no word from the editor stating that the perfect edition ending would be released?

<url>???

I am concern why this user never replies to messages left on her talk page. Does she talk?

I agree with you in that this chapter has no place on <url>, moreover its inclusion there seems highly suspicious. Is there any way to see who added a particular word/sentence/paragraph without manually going through the history?

Sounds good. Could you drop Fritzpoll a note?

That's a couple levels of automation beyond my experience. But if you just got the idea today, then how can you know the false positive level is low enough for WP:AWB/Typos?

It's a low-profile page in the sense of not getting much attention from editors. Why do you think addressing Luther's views on grace is necessary to understand contemporary philosophy?

Thanks; I expected a decline, despite my extensive comments at <url>. As there is nothing more to this article than listings of bylines in non-notable publications, minor book acknowledgments, uncredited movie extra roles, blog comments, paid directory listings, and unsubstantiated claims about wildly over-the-top PR accomplishments, what exactly do you consider to be the examples of "credible notability"?

ED, eh? Have they tried Viagra?

Just now I created this stub. Could you have a look at it, and try to improve it?

Hi there. On a tangential note, would you happen to be <person>?

So, I'm a "deletion fanatic"? Why don't you refrain from uncivil remarks and focus on adding sources to your unsourced stubs - help the encyclopedia rather than pissing off people?

ummm, it's a soft redirect. A placeholder for a future page ... Is there a problem?

I was thinking that it would be appropriate to <url> <url> for the front page on April 16th, 2008, the one-year anniversary of the event. What do you think about that?

You have a lot of cheek marking <url> with <person> without actually taking the trouble to say what needs fixing. If you're really someone who is able to contribute with a "professional" level of English, why not display this supposed proficiency rather than engaging in the illiterate practice of adding templates with tools?

Likewise there is some discussion at <url>, where <url> is categorising itself and its documenttation. Could you please fix that as well?

Yes, I posted a link to the history. I was asking/thinking where you stepped into the discussion and if you were editing as an IP and that would put a different slant on your 3rr warning to Bbb23?, have you been recently editing the article was the simple question?

Hi, <url> to <url> broke the templates. Can you fix that, please?

I think the we've reached consensus in the FAC for <url>, as every opposing reason has been resolved. Do you think it's looking good?

Why did you remove my comment from your page? What was the reason for that?

FYI, I found a unit representative, I think, see <url>. I directed him to your draft for the military reps, would you mind supporting him if you need, I am kindof wrapped up in several different things off wiki and on?

Hi there, it looks like the moving editor has added a bunch of references to the talk page supporting the fact Toto is no longer formally referred to as Moorland Totilas. Do you think if we added one or more of the refs he's added on the talk page to the article we could move it back?

But do you think you can take your concerns to the talk page? Crazy notion, eh?

That would be awesome. Do you want to ask someone for clarification on whether project sandboxes are allowed?

I understand your point about MJ being very close and having competent editors, but do you not think those of us who understand the source problems, etc. that the Reagan page is having should try and explain them to those editors (that is, try to educate them)?

Dear commander, this source: '''* Berg, Ole F.: <person>, Oslo 1997 ISBN 82-993545-2-8''' is a Norwegian source, as signified by the lang|no tag, hence the first letters of months is not supposed to be capital. I thought that tagging sources with lang|no would prevent this problem, isn't that correct?

Stephan, what did you mean by ''"Is English your native language? You seem to fill in a lot of things not said with your assumptions."'' on my talk?

Hi - how's it going? Do you need more time?

Well this seems odd to me. Don't you find it strange that otherwise authoritative sources like Emulex and IBM would be so full of mistakes?

I don't see you around much these days. Busy with non wiki life?

The <url> page said that <url> will be shown on the <url> subchannels 26.5 and 26.6, and also on analog channel 48. It is also expected that The U Too will displace Me Too from analog channel 48. If that's the case, then, where do you suppose Me Too will end up? What new channel in Chicago will it be shown on?

Sorry, I was wondering if the are related to each other or separate organizations? Also is there a difference between North Twillingate and Twillingate?

Wow, you have a lot of gall, given you removed the West Wing discussion from your Talk Page with the edit summary "Archiving crap". Perhaps if your going to make unnecessary comments on people's talk pages, you should hold yourself to the same standard?

May I suggest you actually read the article before claiming it not to be nonsense and removing my CSD tag? Are you an admin?

Ok! First things first, is there anything in particular you would like me to help you out with?

Thanks for the edit. Do you have any informaytion on <url> and artists associated with <url>?

(undent) Your Chinese is much better than mine. Is it possible in Chinese to omit a conjunction such as u548c or u8ddf and let a string of two successive nouns refer to a set of two objects?

...cause I feel like a petulant kid, posting it. But: "We have three volunteers: Awadewit, Mike Christie and Wrad." Given that I, you know, proposed the countries idea, wasn't it obvious that I was volunteering?

That's "fucking consistent naming-schemers", please. Unless there's some actual reason for a) restriction to highways, b) infeasibly small stub categories, and c) inconsistent capitalisation?

I'm really very sorry, but no, I '''didn't''' know, didn't get a message saying that was wrong. Where was it?

I would specifically appreciate an outside view at the thread <url>. What do you feel is the appropriate action?

Hi. I would argue that a consensus is far from being reached, so I'm wondering why you have went ahead and starting changing links?

I've started looking at this article as you asked and inevitably I've got a few questions. Would you prefer me to list them here or on the article's talk page?

In this <url> there was a loss of some info. Was that intentional?

Why would you doubt that. And for that matter why wouldn't you rewrite it yourself?

Are you crazy down here?! What the heck is going on?

Thanks, but why specifically? Because I know the difference between ''hale'' and ''hail''?

It is an obvious and strongly followed point that april fools jokes ''should not disrupt the running of the wiki''. Could you explain why the HELLS you coated a dozen users' pages with pictures of jimbo's ugly bearded fizzogg?

Okay thanks. Any easy way to determine this?

How did I vandalize!!??

Just think about it. If, unlike Saudi Arabia, the US is the Land of the Free, then how come you are only allowed to drink <url>?

I don't think so, Giano. Can we just once attempt to let this pass by without calling for the heads of people?

O RLY? And what does it do there?

When I wrote <url> I was not quite sure if it was a synonym of <url>, and hence did not perform a merge. Could you clarify if they are indeed the same, and if so whether we should merge the articles?

Also, 'topological proof'? Isn't 'proof' a bit strong?

It is fair use. And, I have no free alternative in the context of "Sugoroku Mutou." Now, why don't you find me a replacement picture in the context of "Japanese names," and I will accept the removal of the picture?

If you have something to say for keeping that picture, say it here and I'll copy it over to the FFD page. But, frankly, if you can't even be bothered to check out the <url> rules to find out about why the Zguri image isn't acceptable, how do you expect to be able to make any relevant argument about the other one?

You're right, but loosing it because of Devanampriya, of all users, would be quite a shame for Wikipedia. Don't we have to make a stand against ignorance, partisan POV-pushing and constant incivility?

I'm not sure what you are reffering to. Could you give a link?

Hey, thanks for joining! Have any ideas you wish to add to the project?

I see you've created <url> which I think is great. Would you be able to add the template to the top of the category page, as per its parent <url>, so people can paste it to the top of Talk pages?

If the only page you've been visiting is Wikipedia, then it makes sense the viruses would come from here, but if you've been to other sites, they get thrown into the equation. Again, don't you have any anti-virus software?

You do not appear to have alerted the other previous Delete advocates yet. May we take this as a tacit admission that actually you ''were'' intending to skew the deletion review?

The profile seems good as it is. Why don't we bring this back up after the Hibiki 2-parter?

This is great so far! What do you feel you need help with?

Thank you that clarifies matters. Has the image been listed for deletion on commons, or should I do so?

If people want to know more about her, there's the article on her. Are you really meaning to argue that people could not fully understand the concept of imagism without seeing a picture of HD?

<url> seems a bit bizarre. Why nowrap date fields in cite templates?

Hi. Just out of interest, are you by any chance the same Tom Walker who maintains this <url>?

Thanks. Aside from rewrites and creations (which I've no mind for), anything in particular you see that I should focus on, or is it going okay?

Well, now you've got me puzzled. If you think he's a sneaky vandal, why did you revert my reversion of his numerical change?

Fatwa? What is that?

I'm afraid <url> is slightly under the 5x expansion threshold. Could you please see my comments at <url>?

Hi. Would you be interested in reviewing <url> for its GA nomination?

Hey, I just went ahead and reverted <url>. I was wondering if you wanted your userpage semi-protected to prevent that happening in the future?

I have no need to search the interwebs, all that matters is it offends people and is a violation of NPOV and MoS. "All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly and without bias all significant views (that have been published by reliable sources)" - ess-eff is a bias term for a minority group of fans, put it this way: is there an SF-channel, or how often is the clichxe9 ess-eff used outside fan-groups?

Why did you remove those German emigrant cases. Shouldn't we include those cases of people who was born in what was then Germany at the time?

Technically, Taku is within his rights to change things to conform to an existing standard, but it's not very politic of him to do so; if we decide to change, then it's still more meaningless work to change everything once again. Unfortunately, it's all too common for editors to edit first and talk second, eh?

What's wrong with having everything look the same, the links are for the Official website of the channel so I don't see the problem??

thanks for the welcome! I have a question... how come you can't edit the article about Whales?

I added a clarifying sentence to my user page <url>. Do you think it distills the essence?

I thought that it seemed a bit removed from Imlay's own time and there was no real explanation of the significance of Imlay to Twain (if any) or of Imlay's reputation between her death and the end of the nineteenth century or in America. What do you think?

May I ask why you removed <url> from the article on <url>? Since CAP is the USAF's official auxiliary, wouldn't it make sense for the CAP article to be in the USAF category?

Thanks--can you add the romanization of the Arabic at <url> too? Is it ''jibna baladi''?

Could you please block me indefinitely. If you can't then what do I need to do to get blocked indefinitely?

You seem to have an agenda of denying that some of the ancients were pedophiles. Why?

No kidding. Perhaps you could be troubled to point out the parts you consider to be actionable as 'spam'?

Why can't it just be fixed? There are other tables on wikipedia that aren't working properly, perhaps nobody noticed?

Huh? Is that a web address or a wikilink?

On your Citation templates subpage you have the statement "CS1 and CS2 both use <person> as a meta-template and are variants of APA style." In the past I have had experienced editors tell me this, but none of them could point to any documentation or contemporaneous discussion to verify this statement. Can you point me to any confirmation of this statement?

I based my sentence on the citation. Are you saying the citation is wrong?

I say - are you a sort of picture finder? You couldn't find one of John Bowlby could you?

You support Scotland leaving the United Kingdom despite the fact most Scots do not? I am curious as to why?

Thanks! =D And how soon are we going to try to get The Lost Age to FA?

I don't follow you I was not aware that my edits were vandalism, I was editing according to what had (it appeared to me) been agreed on the talk page, but additional material had been inserted (that had not been agreed upon) that esentialy said the same thing (and was not supported by the sources) that had caused the origioanl disagrement. I think I may have mis-understood you point, are you saying that I can only revert three times if its vandalism, or that my edits were vandalims?

Why tag for deletion? It was obviously a new user's attempt at creating a disambiguation page, why not clean it up?

I give a glimpse there now and then. What is up?

The only books by Paul I was able to find were ''Concordia the Lutheran Confessions: A Readers Edition of the Book of Concord'' (Hardcover - not yet released) and ''Communion fellowship: A resource for understanding, implementing, and retaining the practice of closed communion in the Lutheran parish'' (Unknown Binding - Jan 1, 1992). Are those his scholarly works?