User talk:Tbrittreid/Archive/2007/February

The Prisoner - Number One
Hi, ireact here. You disagreed with my claiming that no one in the Village admits to the existence of Number One. So I've edited the Number One entry to offer both of our respective viewpoints. ireact

Thank you for experimenting with the page The Green Hornet on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you feel that the edit I reverted should not have been reverted, please contact me. -- 68.163.58.18 (talk) 1:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

It took me quite a while to find this. I have audio recordings of actual episodes of the Green Hornet and Lone Ranger shows that prove that the name of the Ranger's nephew/Hornet's father was DAN, not Andy, Reid. Further, that link of Andy Reid goes to a real person, a football coach who was born after the LR TV series was defunct, let alone either radio program. So PLEASE drop this "Andy" bull! tbrittreid aka Ted Watson 19:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Civility
Please try to avoid personal attacks, such as you made in this comment, "Think a bit before you post here again". You may want to consider your tone somewhat, too. Wikipedia has some policies, guidance and essays on behaviour, frustration and stress that may prove helpful: I hope some of them prove of use to you. Happy editing. Steve block Talk 22:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Assume good faith
 * Civility
 * No personal attacks
 * Wikistress
 * Staying cool when the editing gets hot
 * Etiquette
 * No angry mastodons

I deny that the quote constitutes an out-of-line personal attack, but was very good advice and that no other reasonable, relevant and valid line of response was open to me (I say the same thing concerning a posting to that same thread that I am in the process of proofreading at this time; I suggest there that J Greb's making certain mistakes of conjugation, etc., repeatedly and consistently indicates that English may well be no better than his second language and his command of it limited, a situation that, if the fact of the matter, does indeed disqualify him from taking part in a debate of what is and is not proper usage here based on what is and is not proper English usage, that otherwise [you see, I make no assumptions] he needs to learn to proofread, and that there is no third way--I repeat, the first would be truly relevant to the discussion and the alternative is advice Greb would be well advised to accept to eliminate the other which would in this event be a misinterpretation; go check out his/her postings on this thread before you pass judgement on THIS). To return to the posting you brought up: It certainly appears to me--especially given how quickly the less than entirely fair, logical and faithful-to-the-facts message, to which the one of mine you quoted was a reply, was posted after the one by me to which IT was a reply--that he or she did indeed fail to take the time to think it through before posting. If you are going to tell me that OTHERS have a right to be less than logical and fair just to give the false appearance of having successfully defended their previously stated positions against the refutations of them in my postings, and *I* do NOT have the right to point out that such behavior is not proper debate--which it definitely is NOT--even when I do so only by implication and do not come out and SAY that this is what they have done (which in fact is most certainly being civil on my part), you are wrong (or have you already posted a warning on J Greb's "My Talk" page as well?). Ted Watson 20:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)