User:Ramu50/OLD Index/sub 2

Template:Databases edit

I am concerned by some of your changes there - in particular, HSQLDB and SQLJ aren't notable enough for that section, in my opinion, and Knowledge base, Semantic web, and Information architecture are not really core DB concepts either (Semantic web and IA aren't DB concepts at all, per se).

I am going to undo your change, for the time being. Can you discuss your proposed changed on the template talk page?

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Please do not just re-add content without addressing my concerns on the template talk page. What you're doing is edit-warring, which is against Wikipedia policy. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:06, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Ramu50. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Uninvolved_admin_on_Template:Databases --Enric Naval (talk) 02:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Please be aware of Wikipedia policy: No legal threats edit

Your recent edits to Template_talk:Databases could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that this is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Jeh (talk) 22:42, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Please consider refactoring your remarks edit

Calling another editor a 'fucking hypocrite' is never acceptable. Besides being rude, it's the sort of thing that's likely to disincline administrators to pay any attention to your point of view in a dispute.

I would strongly recommend that you refactor your remark on AN/I to remove the personal attack. We expect all editors on Wikipedia to engage with each other in civil discussion, and I caution you that continued personal attacks may lead to a block. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:44, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Note that calling someone a 'f**king hypocrite' isn't actually any less of an attack, or any more acceptable. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Just posting to agree with "10". I suggest using ~~strikehtrough~~ to indicate remarks that you wish to withdraw. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 02:58, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

My infamouse reputation has exceed enough and I don't intend on trying to make it any easier for other to interpret in whatever they feel like. --Ramu50 (talk) 03:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not certain that we understand each other. Are you going to stop calling other editors rude names, or not? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

They have no respect for me, I have no respect for them simple as that. --Ramu50 (talk) 03:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you think that calling other editors names is likely to resolve that problem? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I would consider his answer as "yes". --203.218.193.151 (talk) 19:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Please stop editing templates edit

Until the current discussion about the appropriateness of your templates reorganization work is complete, please stop editing templates. There seems to be general consensus from the other editors at Template:Solaris and Template:Sun Microsystems that your changes to them just now were not good changes.

Please slow down and talk to people about the issues which have been raised. Further editing in ways that people have significantly criticized is highly disruptive editing, and you are edit warring templates, which is always highly suspicious and hostile editing style. Please stop and discuss more constructively. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

If they don't like it they should of express their own opinion, I posted my proposal on there for already one week and so far no one has express anything and they keep on reverting using consensus excuses, when they have express nothing. So its quite evident that if they don't have the respect for others why should I even take their efforts into consideration, moreso why are you involved in reverting the template, when you yourself are minding other buisness you aren't involved in. I am not saying it you couldn't, but do you mind stop making matter worse, what is all of your people's problem. --Ramu50 (talk) 03:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

In both Template talk:Sun Microsystems and Template talk:Databases there are clear concerns that the templates are growing too much and trying to cover too many articles (trust me, there is concern, even if you can't see it). The best thing that can happen from this situation is that your edits cause those templates to be broken into smaller templates with more focused topics. I see no discussion on Template_talk:Solaris, so I can't comment on that --Enric Naval (talk) 04:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Ramu50, many other people and I have asked and warned you to stop, and also complained to administrators many times for the past few weeks about your edits!! Would you please stop?? Raysonho (talk) 05:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I am already working on a update on the 3 template for proposal submissions. Do whatever you like, you guys just like to use my failures to your advantage.

While interesting enough I succeeded in the following

--Ramu50 (talk) 04:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

In Template talk:Intel processors#Consolidation there is one complain about your edits, and one user raised a question in Template talk:Operating system and considered the template as "Wrong titled", also Template talk:IT giants one user thinks by having two templates are better than one. Nobody complained neither means that people agreed on your edits or your edits represent the facts, you must take note of this. --218.102.212.107 (talk) 17:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

And you aRE telling one people opinion and just one, everybody have to go with the minorities opinion. And if I do that, that is against Consensus. What a load of crap you are trying to makeup not knowing the story behind. Nobody is supporting them at all. If most people were against me they would have a revert battle stragit away like the rest.

By the way if you are brave to twist the above mention excuses why uses tyour IP name. In case you didn't know in Template:ATI there was a guy who was against the expansion of template, but kept on using multiples IPs and trying to make other think there was a dicussion by several users, he was lucky I didn't report him, because while we were discussing a new proposal, the draft version was link to his original account.

Go look at all of the IP contributions, they only contributed to Template:ATI and my users page, and the contribution was almost exactly the same time during the conflict time. --Ramu50 (talk) 02:11, 20 October 2008 (UTC)