User talk:Dbulwink

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Hoagie, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Please do recreate the article as it was merged per a discussion here. If you wish to recreate this article, please do so by seeking consensus of the Wikipedia community as whether or not it would be appropriate to do so. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civility warning

Hi there. Two things: you're edit-warring on a page that was merged and redirected as based on a lengthy community discussion found at Talk:Hoagie, and you just personally attacked another editor in this edit summary. Please stop doing both of the above, and discuss your concerns before reverting blindly and insulting other editors. Thanks. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Hoagie. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Please stop, you are ignoring the consensus of the community and are being disruptive. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop assuming ownership of articles such as Hoagie. Doing so may lead to disruptive behavior such as edit wars and is a violation of policy, which may lead to a block from editing. Per your previous comments that the hoagie article will never be merged with submarine sandwich, I would would remind you that contributors do not "own" articles. The Wikipedia community has determined that the articles hoagie, sub sandwich and grinder were sufficiently similar in history and composition that they did not warrant being separate articles. By insisting that you are right and the community, who participated in a long and thorough RfC over the matter, is wrong shows a belief that you own the article and that you can ignore the community. I ask that you please step back and look into other ways to advertise your belief that the articles should not have been merged by either starting another RfC or bringing the matter up in the proper administrtive forum. Reverting the page repeatedly will only result in possible action against you. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you look at a request for comment if you feel that the mediation discussion on the talk page didn't turn out the way that it should have. Reverting the article blindly is not a good approach to getting your changes made. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"welcome to wikipedia"

Do you really think it's appropriate to put "Welcome to Wikipedia" sections on the Talk pages of people who have been here for three years? AnyPerson (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]