User talk:Ledenierhomme
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] denier
Certes, mais en français on dirait alors, l'hommedenier et non le denierhomme. Et encore faudrait-il expliquer le sens d'associer "homme" et "denier".
Attention que la répression vendéenne n'était pas motivée par le fait que ces gens étaient catholiques mais par le fait qu'ils étaient royalistes. La révolution française n'est pas une révolution athée ou laique mais une révolution républicaine avant tout, dans la continuité de la révolution américaine.
Les comparaisons avec Le Pen sont tout à fait incongrues et ne sont pas justifiées. (undue:weight)
Cordialemnet, Alithien 10:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it was of course primarily a Royalist uprising, but these things intersect and I think it is worth mentioning the highly religious nature of most of the Vendee rebels. And I wasn't so much comparing Secher to La Pen, as pointing out that he mixes in the same circles. An "intelligent lay person" would I think be interested and influenced by this fact. Ledenierhomme 03:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Violation of 3RR
You are massively in violation of 3RR at Genocides in history, having reverted the work of other editors no less than nine times in the last 24 hours. I regard violations of 3RR as disrespectful to other editors.
I'm going to give you an opportunity to amend your violation by self reverting. If you remove your edit on the United States alleged genocide - clearly in violation of WP:POINT - I will not report your violation to the admin's noticeboard. Otherwise, I will feel obliged to do so. Regards, Gatoclass 17:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure you understand the 3RR. If I was in violation, you would be too. I see from your Talk Page you are no stranger to edit warring. At any rate, please feel to "report" my "violation". I want as much attention as possible to be directed towards the article - which is grossly disingenuous and unethical. - Ledenierhomme 17:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Okay, have it your way. I'm reporting your violation now. Gatoclass 17:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Ledenierhomme understands the 3RR rule, he just likes to remove the warning messages. diff--Bryson 17:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- "Play the ball, not the man". Engage in talk page to try and come to a consensus, if you have a problem with my edits. So far, I have been supported by two neutrals when I requested for comment. Neither PBS, nor Gatoclass, have been editing by consensus. Ledenierhomme 17:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Request for mediation not accepted
 |
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Genocides in history.
|
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
[edit] AfD nomination of List of massacres
Hi Ledenierhomme, I see you have nominated List of massacres for deletion. Unfortunately you have not completed the process. Currently the notice on the article points to the old AfD nomination which closed in December. You need to create a second AfD nomination and repoint the notice on the article to the second one. Thanks, Gwernol 16:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have commented out (but not removed) the AfD nomination, since until it points to an active debate it isn't useful. Feel free to uncomment once you have fixed it. Best, Gwernol 17:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
You need to call it "List of massacres (2nd nomination)" and follow the steps at Wikipedia:Afd#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion. I don't agree with nominating it, as the article is now stabilising, but that is up to you. See also Talk:List_of_massacres#Article_for_deletion. -- Tyrenius (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- I finished the Afd nomination for you; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres (2nd nomination). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 17:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I was getting there! Ledenierhomme (talk) 17:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Ledenierhomme If you confirm that you agree with my reasons and would like them placed at the top I will do so. But only if you confirm inunequivocal terms that you want them placed there. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
