User talk:Paxcoder

Free sofware vs. Open source

Thanks for pointing this out. Please see my comment on this. Thank you.--torusJKL (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free software

Hi... Why the image is a pointless image man?... is related to free and open sources licences, and the relation to all who interact for make software... really I made a mistake when you add it first ... so I removed that from that place ... Thank you for sending this message ... maybe you can tell me any image related to this, after that I design, and places it in the right place...

V A R G U X write me a comment 05:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment again... Well, I drew this picture ... perhaps, as you mention, I should add arrow and some description, with a caption below.

I will create a new version, adding what you mention and some things that are useful and which are related to FOSS.

V A R G U X

write me a comment 02:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gnewsense

Hi Paxcoder, i dont understand it, on 4 October you add GNU/Linux to the article [[2]] with a comment, and today the reverse, whats up ? also there is no user Paxcoder who joined Talk:GNewSense. So feel free to do so now Mion (talk) 16:55, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no appologies needed, solved. Cheers Mion (talk) 21:32, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About my quote on St. Ignatius

Thanks for not removing the quote Paxcoder. I understand all that stuff about importance when adding citations, but to be honest, what is more important than Ignatius' quotes about Jesus? I mean, people who go to St. Ignatius' page are almost certainly going because of their curiosity of his relation to Jesus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glorthac (talk • contribs) 03:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

La Salette comments

You suggested removal in 2008: I second that, having added some chapter and verse on why on the discussion page, as this is a gross breach of NPOV written by a Catholic adorative. Please contact me on jelmain skynet be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.129.142.15 (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread

Hello, you have been reported on WP:ANI [3]. Regards, --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. These attacks include the edit summaries here, here and here, as well as your tirade here. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 14:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I highly recommend that you and DIREKTOR get a third opinion or take it to dispute resolution before this escalates any further. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 14:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Aloysius Stepinac . While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 15:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article/topic ban. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 15:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]