User talk:Piast93: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:01, 14 December 2010

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Piast93, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Montenegro. 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! Tea with toast (talk) 18:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your Poland-related contributions

Hello and welcome Piast93! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland, joining the project, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with our community.

--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback notice

Hello, Piast93. You have new messages at ConCompS's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ConCompS talk 20:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work

Good job with your quick revert. I decided to make a little joke, but I'm impressed at how quickly you caught it and reverted. People like you really help keep Wikipedia as a serious encyclopedia. 67.241.25.231 (talk) 01:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great work

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Good job patrolling recent changes! Keep it up :P Netalarm^talk 03:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Have a nice day!--Piast93 (talk) 03:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try to avoid personal attacks

As I'm sure you know, your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeepspeed were completely inappropriate and uninformed. Please try to assume good faith and respect other editors in the future. Thanks. Kuguar03 (talk) 22:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although I could be wrong, I don't believe that I assumed bad faith. Do you mind explaining to me why you think that? Perhaps we'll be able to come to a better understanding.--Piast 93 23:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You said "An article being poorly written is no reason for deletion", though that was not the reason given. You said I "should show more discretion in nominating articles for deletion in the future" though the nomination was perfectly valid. It was ultimately declined, but that's how the process works. I did nothing wrong by nominating it, if editors didn't nominate because they might get declined the system wouldn't work. The status of the creator has nothing to do with it. Given that, is there some interpretation of what you said that doesn't involve assumption of bad faith? I must be missing something. I wouldn't attack another editor in a public forum for any reason, but definitely not for completely made up ones. Kuguar03 (talk) 00:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't view that as a personal attack, since comments like that are seen quite often at certain places on Wikipedia and don't really attack anyone. From what I understand, Piast93 is simply telling you to please be more careful in the future and review the article in depth. So no, I don't believe it involves an assumption of bad faith, since we all miss some things some times. A simple reminder to check again at most. If you want more information on personal attacks, please consider reading Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F. Hope that clears some things up! Netalarm^talk 06:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming to bat for me Piast. I'm very new here and still learning the ropes. I'll admit I don't write especially well but I have been intrigued to see this process unfold. Thanks. Jkrell (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Netalarm pretty much said what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me time.--Piast 93 16:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 :::I wouldn't view that as a personal attack, since comments like that are seen quite often at certain places on Wikipedia and don't really attack anyone. From what I understand, Piast93 is simply telling you to please be more careful in the future and review the article in depth. So no, I don't believe it involves an assumption of bad faith, since we all miss some things some times. A simple reminder to check again at most. If you want more information on personal attacks, please consider reading [[Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F]]. Hope that clears some things up! [[User:Netalarm|<font color="#1034A6">'''Netalarm'''</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Netalarm|<font color="#FF5226">'''talk'''</font>]]</sup> 06:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 Thanks for coming to bat for me Piast.  I'm very new here and still learning the ropes.  I'll admit I don't write especially well but I have been intrigued to see this process unfold.  Thanks.  [[User:Jkrell|Jkrell]] ([[User talk:Jkrell|talk]]) 02:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
+:::[[User:Netalarm|Netalarm]] pretty much said what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me time.--'''[[User:Piast93|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: Red">Piast</span>]][[User talk:Piast93|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: Black">93</span>]]''' 16:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)