User talk:Dovo

Removal of material
Regarding your removal of material from the Snickers article (in this edit);

I notice that the exact same thing was done a few days ago (in this edit). Whether or not that was you, please be aware that removing valid material without explanation is normally considered vandalism.

If you have a reason for this removal, please make it clear via the edit summary. If you do this again without explanation, it will be treated as deliberate vandalism. Fourohfour 14:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Additional; I notice you've done this several times before and been warned previously. It's likely that if you do this again, the account will be blocked. Fourohfour 14:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Fourohfour, thanks for your warnings and your threats, bold lettering and general internet retardation. I've added to the edit summary in the Snickers article of why I've removed information. I have also removed the paragraph that was added (most likely by you) once again. Hope this helps you sleep at night. Dovo 09:50, 9 August 2007 {UTC}


 * For someone accusing me of being retarded, you're pretty thick. See that little thing that says "Edit summary (Briefly describe the changes you have made)"? The one that's been staring you in the face for the past six months?
 * Well, this is going to shock you, but... that''s the edit summary box. And it may surprise you to learn that you can use it to briefly describe the changes you have made. No, really!
 * After I'd reverted your latest change with a blank edit summary, I noticed you'd added a comment to the talk page. Fair enough, but if you want to draw attention to this discussion, do it via the edit summary (something like "see talk page"... and you do know what the edit summary is now, don't you? You do? Very good!).
 * Bold text was for your benefit, so you can't whine that you didn't see the important bits, by the way. Fourohfour 18:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you're adorable. I changed some information in the general description of a candy bar and you can't quit kicking and screaming. It wasn't just that it had dead citations, it was also worded poorly. "The original Snickers was formerly known as Marathon in the UK and Ireland."

You mean it was marketed in the UK and Ireland as the Marathon bar, right? Keep the sarcasm coming, it's cute. Dovo 01:28, 7 August 2007 {UTC}


 * Glad you enjoyed the sarcasm. However, you didn't just "change some information", you removed it without explanation.
 * As I pointed out, the dead citations would have been trivial to find replacements for. The wording could have been better, but it's nowhere near as bad as you imply- your confusion seems entirely willful. If you were genuinely acting in good faith (and thought that these were actual problems), it's more likely you'd have tagged them or discussed the problem on the talk page in the first place. Fourohfour 11:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)