User talk:Corbridge

Archives: Index 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Welcome!

Hello, Corbridge, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 15:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Hi Corbridge. Some of your recent edits are bordering on incivility. Please try to direct your comments at the content of Wikipedia, not at the character of other editors. Thanks. Arbor8 (talk) 17:25, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make up facts. You might disagree with things that I said, but you cannot make up facts. I did not make any comments directly at anyone's character. That is just false. Please stop immediately.--Corbridge (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying you stand by the appropriateness of the above edits? Or this edit summary for that matter? Arbor8 (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, absolutely. You stated right above here, "direct your comments at the content of Wikipedia, not at the character of other editors" which states that I have directed comments at the character of other editors and that is false. It is not true. You must stop.--Corbridge (talk) 23:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from ad hominem attacks in your edit summaries. Thanks. Arbor8 (talk) 19:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make false accusations. My comment is not an ad hominem attack. I simply asked you a question. Comment such as this one are not civil. Please follow the rules of civility.--Corbridge (talk) 19:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin article and talk page

Hello, Corbridge. You have new messages at [[User talk: KeptSouth (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC)|User talk: KeptSouth (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC)]].[reply]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dispute resolution

Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia since joining last year. I hope you continue make it a better place. While observing since providing third opinion at Talk:Kristi_Noem#Quotes, I'm offering some unsolicited tips that will hopefully make your experience even more enjoyable here. When there is a misunderstanding or even if it seems like an obvious breach, assume good faith that the other party just didnt know or had a momentary lapse. It is admittedly difficult sometimes to keep one's cool, but if nothing else try to avoid personal attacks or anything that can be misconstrued as one as it can only create or escalate ill will. I can understand frustration that can lead to a comment about "a waste of time and effort", but there is no ownership of articles, and "if you do not want your ideas (for article organization, categorization, style, standards, etc.) challenged or developed by others, then do not submit them" is blunt but true. If an editor's behavior persists and goes beyond the realm of assuming good faith, WP:AVOIDYOU recommends "discussion of a user's conduct is not in itself a personal attack when done in the appropriate forum for such discussion (e.g. the user's talk page, WP:WQA, WP:ANI)." Editing, reverting, and discussing is part of the normal cycle. WP:DR has other ideas for resolving disputes.

I will take Kristi Noem off of my watchlist as you all seem to be heading on the right track. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Bagumba (talk) 20:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfC/U

Hi Corbridge. Wanted to let you know I posted a WP:RFC/USER regarding your edits here: Corbridge. I presume you'll want to weigh in. Arbor8 (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just wanted to check back in and see if you wanted to respond to the RfC/U at all? Arbor8 (talk) 16:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Something of interest

This may be of interest to you. Lionel (talk) 01:18, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Blocked for sock puppetry

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Corbridge. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that this block was in error, and would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 23:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]