User talk:Mycroft.holmes - Revision history

Mycroft.holmes at 17:06, 22 January 2008

Mycroft.holmes — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:06:47 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 22 January 2008
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Mycroft, I agree that the fact should go, that being said, leave it on the page until it is eaither discussed or STUFFed, and you keep saying that STUFF is where it belongs, yet seem to be too lazy to actually STUFF it yourself. Stop it. Please. This is getting nowhere. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)		Mycroft, I agree that the fact should go, that being said, leave it on the page until it is eaither discussed or STUFFed, and you keep saying that STUFF is where it belongs, yet seem to be too lazy to actually STUFF it yourself. Stop it. Please. This is getting nowhere. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
	:Mycroft, if you revert again, I'm going to have to block you. Edit warring is disruptive and unacceptable. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 17:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)		:Mycroft, if you revert again, I'm going to have to block you. Edit warring is disruptive and unacceptable. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 17:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
		+	::FYI, I will be removing the fact in question to STUFF in a moment.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 17:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Heimstern Läufer: /* Edit warring */ warning

Heimstern Läufer — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:05:22 GMT

Edit warring: warning

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:05, 22 January 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Mycroft, I agree that the fact should go, that being said, leave it on the page until it is eaither discussed or STUFFed, and you keep saying that STUFF is where it belongs, yet seem to be too lazy to actually STUFF it yourself. Stop it. Please. This is getting nowhere. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)		Mycroft, I agree that the fact should go, that being said, leave it on the page until it is eaither discussed or STUFFed, and you keep saying that STUFF is where it belongs, yet seem to be too lazy to actually STUFF it yourself. Stop it. Please. This is getting nowhere. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
		+	:Mycroft, if you revert again, I'm going to have to block you. Edit warring is disruptive and unacceptable. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 17:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Defender1031: /**/Edit warring

Defender1031 — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:04:12 GMT

: Edit warring

← Older revision	Revision as of 17:04, 22 January 2008
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	== Edit warring ==

	+	Mycroft, I agree that the fact should go, that being said, leave it on the page until it is eaither discussed or STUFFed, and you keep saying that STUFF is where it belongs, yet seem to be too lazy to actually STUFF it yourself. Stop it. Please. This is getting nowhere. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Mycroft.holmes: blanked the page

Mycroft.holmes — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 22:03:59 GMT

blanked the page

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:03, 14 November 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	~~==[[User talk:Mycroft.holmes/archive\|Archive]]==~~	+

Mycroft.holmes: /* So Negative... */

Mycroft.holmes — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:59:47 GMT

So Negative...

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 18 March 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==[[User talk:Mycroft.holmes/archive\|Archive]]==		==[[User talk:Mycroft.holmes/archive\|Archive]]==
-
-	~~== So Negative... ==~~
-
-	~~Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)~~
-	:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-	~~::Couldn't have said it better myself.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)~~
-
-	:::Yeah, well, it's one thing to vote against things in STUFF. It's another to create sockpuppets to forward one's agenda. (I know it's bumping after the fact, but it needs to be said). --[[User:ISlayedTheKerrek\|ISlayedTheKerrek]] 16:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

ISlayedTheKerrek: /* So Negative... */

ISlayedTheKerrek — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:41:20 GMT

So Negative...

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:41, 16 March 2007
Line 7:		Line 7:

	::Couldn't have said it better myself.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)		::Couldn't have said it better myself.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::Yeah, well, it's one thing to vote against things in STUFF. It's another to create sockpuppets to forward one's agenda. (I know it's bumping after the fact, but it needs to be said). --[[User:ISlayedTheKerrek\|ISlayedTheKerrek]] 16:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Mycroft.holmes: /* So Negative... */

Mycroft.holmes — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 03:37:55 GMT

So Negative...

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:37, 2 January 2007
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)		Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
	:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)		:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
		+
	::Couldn't have said it better myself.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)		::Couldn't have said it better myself.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Mycroft.holmes: /* So Negative... */

Mycroft.holmes — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 03:37:41 GMT

So Negative...

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:37, 2 January 2007
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)		Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
	:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)		:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
		+	::Couldn't have said it better myself.--[[User:Mycroft.holmes\|Mycroft Holmes]] 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Mycroft.holmes: /* Archive */

Mycroft.holmes — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 03:32:50 GMT

Mycroft.holmes at 03:31, 2 January 2007

Mycroft.holmes — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 03:31:41 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:31, 2 January 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	==Archive==
		+
		+	[[User talk:Mycroft.holmes/archive\|Archive]]
		+
	== So Negative... ==		== So Negative... ==

	Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)		Any reason as to why you never vote accept in STUFF arguments? --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 02:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
	:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)		:Funny, come to think of it I rarely do either. Can't speak for Mycroft, but in my case I find most STUFFED facts to be lacking in some way, usually speculation or TTATOT. I must be more conservative than other users, I suppose. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 02:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:32, 2 January 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	==~~Archive==~~	+	==[[User talk:Mycroft.holmes/archive\|Archive]]==
-		+
-	[[User talk:Mycroft.holmes/archive\|Archive]]	+

	== So Negative... ==		== So Negative... ==