User talk:...adam.../Archive May 2007

Commons account

Why the suffix? ed g2s • talk 00:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Davesmith33

Don't worry, I'm keeping and eye on him. Gwernol 12:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Joke "new message" banner

Thank you for your edits but no, thanks--Kamikaze 15:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jolly mean to edit my user page and talk page without no serious reason. I am aware of the policy and it does not "state" such things are prohibited. I have found no consensus regarding this (as the history of my userpage indicates, some user tried too to remove that but was reverted by another editor). Have a nice day. And please refrain from editing my user page as you are not only removing said banner but also other contents.--Kamikaze 16:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are not writing to break the 3RR by editing from multiple ips.--Kamikaze 16:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, my user page is not an encyclopedic article. Thousands of user pages, even admin page, have what you call "non-encyclopedic" content.--Kamikaze 16:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, there is a difference between "is discouraged" or "should not" and "is not allowed" and "must not". Are you able to perceive it?--Kamikaze 16:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are in error. End of story.--Kamikaze 16:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. Too bad it is not supported by a community

consensus.--Kamikaze 16:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:USER is not actually supporting your point as non-encyclopedic content thing is meant to prevent spamming and advertising. Moreover it is certaninly ambiguous. If you to take it ad litteram, non-encyclopedic content could be considered wikipedian's edits about themselves. And I certainly see no consensus at WT:USER.--Kamikaze 16:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]