[edit] Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 20:54, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] March 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The project's content policies require that all articles be written from a neutral point of view, and not introduce bias or give undue weight to viewpoints. Please bear this in mind when making edits such as your recent edit to Clinique. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Ipatrol (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome
Greetings...
Hello, 99.231.196.195, and welcome to Wikipedia!
- To get started, click on the green welcome.
- I hope you like it here and decide to stay!
- Ipatrol
- Happy editing! Ipatrol (talk) 21:54, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Talkback
Ipatrol (talk) 22:01, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Clinique
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:Thirteen squared. Thank you. You removed a lot of highly important links with your change to the Clinique article to other Wikipedia articles across various languages, category tags, and the main website. I did nothing malicious in restoring them. By editing here, you agree to have your work edited mercilessly or removed all together. If you cannot handle that aspect of editing on Wikipedia, you need to go to a different Wiki. If you continue to attack me on my talk page without assuming good faith, I will take it to arbitration with administration. You are required to act in a civil manner here. Please re-evaluate the way you interact with others. Thank you. 132 01:34, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
- Also, you might not want to make assumptions about why I reverted your edit because, really, they couldn't be more off-base. Like I've said elsewhere, the links to the FDA can't be used as they are not Clinique specific and would thus violate synthesis. That's why I removed them, not because I like the product. In fact, I've never even used the product. I don't even know where to get the stuff. Assuming good faith, instead of bad would do you a whole lot of good. Not making knee-jerk reactions and jumping to conclusions would also do you well. --132 18:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Please do not assume ownership of articles such as Clinique. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. Since you mentioned this in your highly inflammatory message on my talk page, I thought I'd warn you for this as well. You, nor anyone else, owns any article on Wikipedia. At all. Ever. Anyone is allowed to edit any page they like (unless that page is protected or the user has been blocked for vandalism). You do not have the right to dictate ownership over any articles. To do so and act in a way that appears like you believe you own it will lead to nothing but a swift ban. 132 01:36, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Ok, now that I've given you the appropriate warnings, I'll bring the actual issue up here. When you made your edits, you reintroduced information that is only tangentially related to Clinique (government information on what can and be called things belongs on those specific articles, not on the generic Clinque article), you removed product lines which at least need some sort of a mention, and you removed many, many valid external links, a reference list, category lists, and inter-wiki links to other languages. For these reasons, I reverted your edit.
I have no issue with reincorporating some things you added in your edit, but not all of it and you certainly removed too much. Please discuss this in a calm and rational manner so we can come to a mutual decision about what is to be done. Thank you. --132 01:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Response
Fair enough, I was already in a foul mood that day and should have chilled before posting. My response on your talk page was more about me being hurt than an attack on you. My bad.
Though I take exception to the tone you used describing my edit: "sloppy edit; it actually REINTRODUCED pov stuff and removed a lot of important things (categories, links, etc)." in that (1) "sloppy" suggests carelessness in my work. It may have been formatted incorrectly, which is perfectly acceptable to address, though I do not think it was "sloppy"; and (2) there is no need to SHOUT ABOUT REINTRODUCING which pays off as hostile and angry, insinuating I somehow offended you by editing an article that belongs to you.
The article has been tagged for more than a year, and keeps being edited with (in my opinion) promotional material about the products. Clearly you feel my edit wasn't at all an improvement over the latter, though the current article has unreferenced information and an incomplete sentence (see Clinique Medical). I'll stay off the page, though someone should at least correct the grammatical error.--99.231.196.195 (talk) 11:28, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- I never shouted in the edit summary. Unfortunately you cannot use italics or bolding or any other formatting to emphasize information within an edit summary. Just a head's up, if someone caps only a word or two in an entire edit summary, they're emphasizing stuff, not shouting. As for the sloppy comment, it was due to formatting and yes, formatting can make an entire edit sloppy, especially if it removes vital stuff (references, interwiki links, external links, category tags, etc). If you'd take a look at both the Clinique page and the talk page, you'll see that I've since reintroduced quite a few of the changes you made. While all together they were unacceptable, you did have some good stuff and I re-added that good stuff. --132 16:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
