User talk:Na Na Utlog
Na Na Utlog, you are invited to the Teahouse
[edit]
|
Hi Na Na Utlog! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
September 2013
[edit]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Gil Puyat LRT Station may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- Gil Puyat station is the fourth station for trains headed to [[Roosevelt LRT Station|Roosevelt]]]], the seventeenth station for trains headed to [[Baclaran LRT Station|Baclaran]], and is one of the
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:04, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Warning
[edit]Hi we appreciate a newcomer's desire on editing in improving wikipedia pages but if you insist on editing articles like Central Terminal LRT Station in which you remove some uncontested facts, then an indefinite suspension will be imposed unto you.JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- I removed the in my opinion dubious reason for naming this station, and some moments later you add another reason that obviously qualifies as Original Research. That's just unheard. And, you're even too young to have learned this yourself while working there. Pretty unbelievable, JSD, you're not making a smart move there. Na Na Utlog (talk) 13:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Clearly you are out of your mind, first is that this is a unquestionable no-brainer fact and a person who has a very low comprehension skill would be the only one not to be able to decipher even without resource backing why the station is named as such. To make it simple there are only three terminals in the original or main line of the LRT Line 1 namely the North end or Monumento Terminal Station, South end or the Baclaran Terminal Station and the only terminal between these two terminals of which the name was derived and thus called Central Terminal Station. Age is not the issue here as i had my On-the-Job training in the line just this 2011 and part of our task is to get to know the history of the line which included history on why Central Terminal is called as such and not Arrocceros which by the way is more unreferenced and puts your argument on bad grounds. In the mean time if you really want to contest the fact, dont revert the edits I made just yet, but instead put it into the talk page and let the other wikipedians decide on the matter especially those like me who have been doing this for a long time and leave my edit until a consensus is made.JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 16:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- If you're going to discuss this way, you'll only get blocked yourself, this is - to put it mildly - quite impolite. Na Na Utlog (talk) 20:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- I apologize if my earlier statement seems rude then if the argument is about sources then maybe its just right to remove the "Arroceros" as it is not supported by sources Again I apologize JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- If you're going to discuss this way, you'll only get blocked yourself, this is - to put it mildly - quite impolite. Na Na Utlog (talk) 20:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Clearly you are out of your mind, first is that this is a unquestionable no-brainer fact and a person who has a very low comprehension skill would be the only one not to be able to decipher even without resource backing why the station is named as such. To make it simple there are only three terminals in the original or main line of the LRT Line 1 namely the North end or Monumento Terminal Station, South end or the Baclaran Terminal Station and the only terminal between these two terminals of which the name was derived and thus called Central Terminal Station. Age is not the issue here as i had my On-the-Job training in the line just this 2011 and part of our task is to get to know the history of the line which included history on why Central Terminal is called as such and not Arrocceros which by the way is more unreferenced and puts your argument on bad grounds. In the mean time if you really want to contest the fact, dont revert the edits I made just yet, but instead put it into the talk page and let the other wikipedians decide on the matter especially those like me who have been doing this for a long time and leave my edit until a consensus is made.JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 16:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)