31:
637:
272:
perhaps even me. (Tho that is not anything I wish to do at the moment) Your actions are disruptive, and can actually get you into trouble if you don't step it down. I am saying all this to you because I think your heart is in the right place. Please stop what you are doing. Seriously. You are swamping the discussion with trivia, and that is considered very disruptive. Stop. --
141:
The specific citation for the graf in question states that the differences are cosmetic. While the VPC cite does not directly state that the banned features were cosmetic, the implication is the same. If a feature detailed in the law was functional, it is not possible to circumvent it with a cosmetic
315:
1. You wrote on August 23, “The changes you made were supported by sources, and you did not discuss them here.” I replied with a detailed explanation of what had been discussed and what I’d changed (including clear reasons for WP:WORDS). I also asked you to identify what you were referring to, which
333:
The sentence fragment you are referring to was rejected because it was in the summary of the cited report. The replacement text (that you deleted) was not in the summary. After I made this change, no further objection was raised. (In fact, the first part of the same sentence cites the same source.)
407:
If you don't want to answer my questions, I can respect that, but please don't claim to know my intentions. Also, short of just giving up on being an editor on the topic in question, I am afraid someone may complain about me. I hope not - but what you wrote makes me feel like you're hoping someone
340:
I see no evidence that every change to the page is preceded by consensus, and I see no WP policy that says that every change should be. Nonetheless, because of your comments and others’ comments, I have started discussions on things that I might otherwise have just changed per WP:BOLD – just to be
271:
Like you, I am not a gun supporter. I don't see any particular need for assault weapons. If anything I am neutral on the subject, perhaps with a slight bias towards banning them. But what you are doing is NOT the way things are done. You are upsetting people, and eventually somebody will complain,
91:
Please read the 'talk' page for the AWB article. The matter has been discussed previously. Scrubbing the word cosmetic from the article because it doesn't appear in the law isn't a valid reason. The cited sources state that the differences are cosmetic. It is the cited sources that matter here.
674:
That was a mistake, and I apologized on the talk page. Since you came here, I will also apologize to you personally. I am sorry. I had to reset my computer in the middle of composing a response, and I must've botched it when I restarted and refinished my post. I would not delete a talk page on
700:
a comment to a user's page instead of his talk page over five weeks ago - just a few days after I became active as an editor - but I corrected and apologized for that. Then I accidentally deleted AWB talk page sections above the one I was responding to yesterday, which someone else caught and
347:
Is it your wish that I make no changes and engage in no discussion? If not, please stop reverting my changes, give me details of your objections, and let me participate as an editor who is trying to participate in good faith. I am beginning to feel hassled by you and a couple other editors.
156:
I can't argue with you about this indefinitely. I will start some sort of dispute process, after I decide which one seems most appropriate. Do you have the article locked right now? I am trying to fix the link to the NRA citation, which has been moved from nra.org to the NRA-ILA page.
311:
Please, if you disagree with something I do give me details and links so I can know what you’re referring to. If you believe that other editors have reached consensus on something that I missed please give me details and links so I can know that too. For example:
190:
I have read your comments on my talk page, and archived them. You then added a second copy to my archive, which I removed. Then you posted your personal comments on the AWB page, which is an inappropriate use of the page. Please stop. Thank you.
458:- and before anyone else had commented on it. If I changed it after a comment, I would have used struck-through text. WP:REDACT allows this, and also says: "Please do not apply any such changes to other editors' comments without permission."
701:
corrected, and for which I explained myself and apologized. Your warning is a "last" warning about removing or blanking page content or templates. Shouldn't there be one or more previous warnings to that effect before a "last"? Thanks.
592:
with me. If you feel you must revert an edit I make, then please cite the relevant policy, guideline, or principle. If you want to discuss an edit I make, then start a talk page discussion. I do both of these things, as directed in
122:
says, "Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing 'post-ban' assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts." That is
251:
I'm sorry but I do not see how I can help you with the
Federal Assault Weapons Ban article. I would normally have suggested you discuss it on the that articles talk page but you have already done that.
612:(by making "you" statements and directing commands at me). You have reverted numerous edits I've made, and you basically keep telling me I need to discuss every edit I make before I make it. That's not
514:
for personal attacks and remarks, like "please do this yourself in the future," "trivia," "no drama please," "topic ban?" "cite sources please," and "please change them back." Also, please don't
807:
Re: the third "here," from 5 SEP 2013, again: Accusations, but no diffs. In fact, from 9 AUG to 18 SEP I was engaged by at least 10 other editors' questions and comments; many were
206:
If I had known that you would read and archive my post within a matter of minutes, I would not have posted other copies. I honestly thought they were lost in the posting process.
308:
FWIW: I posted a notice last Monday (Aug. 26) on the AWB talk page that I was going to be away from my desk. I don't know if you saw that, but I am back now.
372:
I am not going to get into this with you. You and I both know what you are doing. If you choose to continue, somebody will make a complaint. That is all. --
731:
on your talk page. That doesn't include the discussions and warnings on the talk page. As long as you work with everyone, there shouldn't be a problem.
815:(didn't know the term at the time). Whether it was intentional or not, I don't know, but (with the exception of hidden text) that's what I experienced. --
791:
110:. There were only three identifiable participants in the conversation. Certainly, no-one invited me. But at any rate, the cited sources do
534:
79:
71:
66:
344:
4. Now you tell me that I’m “swamping the discussion with trivia” – but without any details or links to what you think is trivial.
330:
to a sentence in the
Expiration and effect on crime section. You wrote, “Sentence fragment was removed with consensus originally.”
645:
107:
323:” (you have to scroll down) - And you still left unanswered my request for specifics on exactly what you were referring to.
557:
381:
281:
337:
3. Re: my Aug. 15 addition, you also wrote that I’d “replaced the term unilaterally and started discussion thereafter.”
798:
and 28 AUG. During this time the editor accused me of whitewashing and didn't give diffs - even after I asked for them.
650:
790:
As for the second "here", from 28 AUG 2013: There are no diffs in the editor's comments. In fact, if one studies the
38:
811:
on contributor, not content. But in either case I was kept very busy trying to reply. In hindsight, I experienced
812:
487:
PS: I also just realized that you changed my post without my permission and then you closed the whole section.
490:
Since you are the closer, I don't want to revert the change you made without my permission. Please change it.
820:
706:
680:
621:
530:
501:
478:
413:
356:
216:
162:
132:
47:
17:
522:
464:
Please stop. If you have a problem with something I post, please say it - civilly - on the correct page.
795:
554:
378:
278:
609:
515:
454:. I accidentally hit Save page instead of Show preview. Perhaps you have never done this. At any rate,
319:
Then, on Aug. 30, you inserted “NOT” into the middle of your same Aug. 23 statement so it now reads, “
234:
196:
176:
147:
97:
598:
511:
738:
662:
644:. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Knowledge (XXG), as you did at
816:
702:
676:
617:
526:
497:
474:
409:
352:
212:
158:
128:
762:
Re: the first "here," it was a misunderstanding. On 10 AUG 2013 I made a newbie mistake and
577:
550:
441:
374:
298:
274:
613:
605:
589:
824:
744:
710:
684:
668:
625:
562:
538:
505:
482:
417:
386:
360:
286:
261:
257:
238:
230:
220:
200:
192:
180:
172:
166:
151:
143:
136:
101:
93:
808:
594:
733:
657:
548:
I asked you not to post this sort of thing to my talk page. I do not enjoy drama. --
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
754:
Realized I archived this without addressing GJP's final comments. My response:
636:
253:
115:
456:
I finished editing my own comment less than 10 seconds after I hit save
119:
696:
Second, I have never intentionally vandalized a page. I accidentally
461:
You keep saying you're done editing my posts, but you keep doing it.
719:
It's a template warning. BTW, you have received earlier warnings,
114:
support the claim that assault weapons features are cosmetic.
25:
691:
First, I want to thank you for the link to the mentor page.
127:
the same as saying that the banned features were cosmetic.
774:
the first time I'd ever posted to another editor's space.
778:
773:
763:
728:
724:
720:
581:
455:
451:
444:
327:
320:
301:
794:, one will find that the editor gave no diffs between
211:
You do not otherwise wish to respond to my request?
321:
The changes you made were NOT supported by sources…
764:accidentally posted to another editor's user page
588:Sue Rangell, please stop using edit summaries to
171:I'm not an administrator, I can't lock articles.
584:, but she moved it to Lightbreather's talk page.
447:, but she moved it to Lightbreather's talk page.
304:, but she moved it to Lightbreather's talk page.
8:
229:There were no requests in your comments.
779:removed by the same editor who posted it
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
792:assault weapons ban talk page archive
7:
452:You edited my comment on a talk page
326:2. Today (September 1) you deleted
108:the 'talk' page for the AWB article
796:16 AUG (when I asked for her help)
328:WP:BALANCE that I added on Aug. 15
24:
646:Talk:Federal Assault Weapons Ban
635:
467:Also, please don't SHOUT at me.
29:
745:15:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
711:15:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
685:01:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
669:01:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
626:19:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
1:
576:Lightbreather posted this on
563:17:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
539:15:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
510:PPS: Also, please stop using
506:11:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
483:11:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
440:Lightbreather posted this on
418:04:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
387:03:22, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
361:23:25, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
297:Lightbreather posted this on
142:change. The matter is cited.
825:18:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
608:, and you keep making this
287:20:19, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
262:16:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
239:23:05, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
221:23:03, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
201:22:56, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
181:03:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
167:00:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
152:00:23, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
137:00:05, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
843:
102:22:15, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
571:Sue Rangell, please stop
445:talk page on 6 SEP 2013
302:talk page on 1 SEP 2013
18:User talk:Lightbreather
653:without further notice
42:of past discussions.
651:blocked from editing
247:You request for help
118:does not work, and
518:so much with me.
542:
525:comment added by
341:WP:CAREFUL, but…
85:
84:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
834:
777:The warning was
743:
741:
736:
667:
665:
660:
639:
606:focus on content
561:
560:
541:
519:
385:
384:
285:
284:
120:the VPC citation
116:The NRA citation
63:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
842:
841:
837:
836:
835:
833:
832:
831:
813:POV railroading
766:instead of his
755:
739:
734:
732:
663:
658:
656:
633:
604:I am trying to
585:
573:
553:
549:
520:
448:
437:
377:
373:
316:you never did.
305:
294:
277:
273:
269:
249:
188:
89:
59:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
840:
838:
830:
829:
828:
827:
802:
801:
800:
799:
785:
784:
783:
782:
757:
756:
753:
750:
749:
748:
747:
714:
713:
693:
692:
688:
687:
632:
631:September 2013
629:
575:
572:
569:
568:
567:
566:
565:
493:Thanks again.
439:
436:
433:
431:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
423:
422:
421:
420:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
296:
293:
290:
268:
265:
248:
245:
244:
243:
242:
241:
224:
223:
208:
207:
187:
184:
88:
86:
83:
82:
77:
74:
69:
64:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
839:
826:
822:
818:
817:Lightbreather
814:
810:
806:
805:
804:
803:
797:
793:
789:
788:
787:
786:
780:
776:
775:
769:
765:
761:
760:
759:
758:
752:
751:
746:
742:
737:
730:
726:
722:
718:
717:
716:
715:
712:
708:
704:
703:Lightbreather
699:
695:
694:
690:
689:
686:
682:
678:
677:Lightbreather
673:
672:
671:
670:
666:
661:
654:
652:
648:, you may be
647:
643:
640:This is your
638:
630:
628:
627:
623:
619:
618:Lightbreather
615:
611:
607:
602:
600:
596:
591:
586:
583:
580:talk page on
579:
578:Sue Rangell's
570:
564:
559:
556:
552:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
540:
536:
532:
528:
527:Lightbreather
524:
517:
513:
508:
507:
503:
499:
498:Lightbreather
494:
491:
488:
485:
484:
480:
476:
475:Lightbreather
471:
468:
465:
462:
459:
457:
453:
449:
446:
443:
442:Sue Rangell's
434:
432:
419:
415:
411:
410:Lightbreather
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
388:
383:
380:
376:
371:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
358:
354:
353:Lightbreather
349:
345:
342:
338:
335:
331:
329:
324:
322:
317:
313:
309:
306:
303:
300:
299:Sue Rangell's
291:
289:
288:
283:
280:
276:
266:
264:
263:
259:
255:
246:
240:
236:
232:
228:
227:
226:
225:
222:
218:
214:
213:Lightbreather
210:
209:
205:
204:
203:
202:
198:
194:
185:
183:
182:
178:
174:
169:
168:
164:
160:
159:Lightbreather
154:
153:
149:
145:
139:
138:
134:
130:
129:Lightbreather
126:
121:
117:
113:
109:
104:
103:
99:
95:
87:
81:
78:
75:
73:
70:
68:
65:
62:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
771:
767:
697:
649:
642:last warning
641:
634:
603:
587:
574:
521:— Preceding
509:
495:
492:
489:
486:
472:
469:
466:
463:
460:
450:
438:
435:Please stop
430:
350:
346:
343:
339:
336:
332:
325:
318:
314:
310:
307:
295:
292:Please stop
270:
250:
189:
170:
155:
140:
124:
111:
105:
90:
60:
43:
37:
582:17 SEP 2013
551:Sue Rangell
516:personalize
375:Sue Rangell
275:Sue Rangell
267:PLEASE STOP
186:Please stop
106:I did read
36:This is an
599:WP:REVTALK
512:WP:REVTALK
231:Anastrophe
193:Anastrophe
173:Anastrophe
144:Anastrophe
94:Anastrophe
735:GregJackP
675:purpose.
659:GregJackP
80:Archive 5
72:Archive 3
67:Archive 2
61:Archive 1
610:personal
535:contribs
523:unsigned
470:Thanks.
772:It was
740:Boomer!
664:Boomer!
39:archive
770:page.
727:, and
408:will.
809:WP:PA
698:added
614:civil
595:WP:ES
254:RJFJR
16:<
821:talk
768:talk
729:here
725:here
721:here
707:talk
681:talk
622:talk
597:and
531:talk
502:talk
479:talk
414:talk
357:talk
258:talk
235:talk
217:talk
197:talk
177:talk
163:talk
148:talk
133:talk
98:talk
655:.
590:war
125:not
112:not
823:)
723:,
709:)
683:)
624:)
616:.
601:.
555:✍
537:)
533:•
504:)
496:--
481:)
473:--
416:)
379:✍
359:)
351:--
279:✍
260:)
237:)
219:)
199:)
179:)
165:)
150:)
135:)
100:)
76:→
819:(
781:.
705:(
679:(
620:(
558:✉
529:(
500:(
477:(
412:(
382:✉
355:(
282:✉
256:(
233:(
215:(
195:(
175:(
161:(
146:(
131:(
96:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.