Welcome

edit
Hello, Atomic blunder! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking   or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Verbal chat 18:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

NPOV

edit

"Actually, my main concern was that Slrubenstein was not following the consensus and there was reverting back and forth. --Atomic blunder (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)" - well, actually, when an editor is fairly confident that something is a cler violation of policy, it is not at all uncommon around here for he to revert. But I am glad to assume good faith. Even given what you wrote, I do hope you are giving real consideration to the substance of what I wrote on the talk page. I really have made a serious effort to explain myself. Oh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Slrubenstein | Talk 05:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I removed a ----, what did you want to contibute to the talk:page and can I help with that? cygnis insignis 21:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

policing admins

edit

you had a good idea! I did this I hope you will edit it as you see necessary, and perhaps begin the analysis. Slrubenstein | Talk 15:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

WP:TAGTEAM and Consensus

edit

I've rarely seen anything good come of linking to WP:TAGTEAM. Ironically, I most often see it used as a derogatory label against editors properly working to consensus. --Ronz (talk) 22:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not using edit summary

edit

I know (now) that your most recent edit was only placing a comma in Wikipedia:Harassment, and as such a very small edit. However, if you would have explained so in the edit summary (instead of leaving it blank), I would not have had to look at the diff. I would appreciate it, if you could do so in the future. Thanks. Cheers. --Law Lord (talk) 13:58, 12 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sockpuppetry case

edit
 

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jagz for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. T34CH (talk) 23:23, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply