User talk:YaskMe

Please don't "Undo" constructive edits without discussing first!
Hi there, "YaskMe".

You seem to have embarked on a campaign of undoing edits without explaining the problem you have with them. It would be much more constructive if you could edit to improve the text, or discuss your concerns on the talk page. Aggressive undoing and commenting will only do you disservice in the long run, and could even end up getting you banned.

It appears now that the issue you have with my tidying up of the Call/Recall section of 3D optical data storage may be that I removed a couple of references. The reason I did that is because they are now superseded by the recent Nature Photonics paper, which is (i) much more up-to-date, (ii) in a much better source, and (iii) a real technical document written by the research team, rather than a news report based on a press release. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia rather than a list of sources, it is not necessary to have several references that overlap in content.

If you think that one or more of the removed references is important for some specific reason, then why not just put back the reference(s) you feel is/are necessary, and explain your reasoning on the talk page? Undoing the entire edit is disruptive, since it also removes a lot of other changes (the Call/Recall section was quite a mess before I worked on it).

I hope we can get past this with a little discussion, and move on to some constructive and unbiased contribution to Wikipedia.

• TheBendster (talk) 10 July 2008, 07:24 (UTC)

Bendster, you're a real a**h***. Go and f*** y***s***.

Please discuss it...
... on the talk page. At the very least, explain your actions. • TheBendster (talk) 10 July 2008, 12:28 (UTC)

Blocked
This account has been blocked for disruptive editing with an appearance of conflict of interest. Jehochman Talk 09:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you understand that you were edit warring and that is unacceptable? Toddst1 (talk) 19:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)