This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KillerChihuahua.
Wikimedia Foundation
Talk to the Puppy To leave a message on this page, click here.
If you email me, be aware that even if I am actively editing, I cannot always access my email and it may be a day or two before you receive a reply. If you message me on this page, I will probably reply on this page. If I messaged you on your page, please reply there.
*Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
*Comment about the content of a specific article on the Talk: page of that article, and not here.
*Sign your post using four tildes ( ~~~~ )
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
How not to respond when an administrator warns you not to harass another editor:
Thank you. Mr. WikiCop. Now it would be nice if you weren't being so persnickety about meaningless things like this, and instead help out on new-page patrol to clear out the endless stream of pure vandalism and attack pages, articles about bands that were formed last week, and spam of all flavors. If you don't want to help, then get out of the way while the rest of us get down to work. (It would also help if you addressed the issue of borderline spam in the article that started this whole affair.)[1]
Given that this ip has done nothing but vandalize Wikipedia since it was last blocked, I think a longer block would be appropriate than the previous one. The ip is part of Davis School District, Farmington, UT. --Ronz (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which, that we don't generally issue long blocks for schools, or that we can't reblock? Of course block length is admin discretion, but this is a shared IP, by definition. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice20:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm 3RR'd out on Family Research Council so I won't be making any more edits today, but I would ask you to please review my rationale for claiming a synthesis violation on the article talk page before reverting my edits. Taking a primary source statement made by someone and then refuting it with another unrelated primary source is the very definition of synthesis. Thanks. Uncle Dick (talk) 23:10, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I read your rationale prior to reverting. You are in error. There is no SYNTH violation in the disputed content.
Please note that you can be blocked for edit warring even if you do not pass, or even reach, 3 reverts. I suggest that instead of mindlessly reverting and repeating your SYNTH assertions, you actually try to discuss this with other editors, who are clearly unpersuaded by your arguments thyus far. You should respect consensus; not edit war. It is BRD not BRRR. Unless and until consensus changes, you are edit warring against that consensus and this is not a productive course of action. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice23:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Puppy - quick question for you, since it involves an area you (and others here) have more experience with than me. A particular user has been adding the Category:American pro-life activists to the articles of American politicians who express pro-life views. Is that a typical use of this category? My impression was that "activist" categories would apply to people who are primarily known for, well, activism like protesting and organizing, as opposed to politicians who subscribe to a view, no matter how ardently. Cheers! Kellyhi!00:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no interest in petty pique. You were wasting everyone's time. Now you are wasting mine. Feel free to do something useful. Paul B (talk) 12:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you intended to accomplish with this post; you have managed to insult me yet again and I see no other purpose in this post. I suggest in the future if all you have is an insult, you take the less disruptive path, and refrain from posting at all. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice13:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This really is not some kind of pissing contest. If you "cannot bear" people being offended, then take care not to offend. Avoiding ABF and NPA violations would be a good start. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice16:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
