gandydancer造句

• Such sourcing should not be rejected through wikilawyering and through IDONTLIKEIT arguments like that it is a negativity cluster bomb or that every word needs sourcing etc . Anyway D? 趣? it is a paragraph which is helpful to the movement if you want to see it that way, because to everyone but their base the Rush-like comments look horrible as Gandydancer said.
• Of the total of four edits I made to the article ( Ludwigs2 made 15 with many reverts ) after the whole debacle started ( by Gandydancer's two edits on 01 / 24 / 2010 ), three were reverts and one other edit was used to restore Ludwigs2's tag ( which was inadvertently deleted in a revert ) with the edit summary " " reinstating your change.
• After reading that several attempts had been made to get him to conform to the accepted manner of posting without success I decided to ignore his posts ( as pointed out by OS above ), though that's probably not the best way to go about trying to keep the talk page readable either .-- Gandydancer, at 21 : 34, 29 May 2012 ( UTC ) "'excerpt
• It should also be noted that I have had interpersonal conflict with Gandydancer and Montanbw in the past and they dislike me personally, with a vengeance, that s for sure, and from also a motive of vengeance IMO but the fact is, they never, ever provide diffs, or any evidence at all to back up their drive-by comments and just suddenly appear, wherever I am being discussed by Flyer22reborn.
• I believe that this is what Petrachan has been doing recently-- namely, convinced that a cabal is controlling the GM articles, he / she has been canvassing to try to " loosely organize " a group to " fight back ", as Petrarchan, User : Gandydancer, User : Coretheapple, and User : Binksternet, and User talk : Buster7 did in working on the BP article ( which you can see if you review their user Talk pages-they constantly encouraged one another and discussed what was going on in the BP article in their Talk pages . " User : Binksternet was peripherally involved in that ."
• I think your intentions are good, but I'm failing to understand how you can explain this statement : " " it is a paragraph which is helpful to the movement if you want to see it that way, because to everyone but their base the Rush-like comments look horrible as Gandydancer said " " ( because specifically I remember temporarily convincing Gandydancer for a day to my side of this argument by using the analogy of Obama's abortion comment that pregnancy is " punishment " for sex on the talk page late last year )---> talk ) 19 : 51, 13 March 2012 ( UTC)
• I think your intentions are good, but I'm failing to understand how you can explain this statement : " " it is a paragraph which is helpful to the movement if you want to see it that way, because to everyone but their base the Rush-like comments look horrible as Gandydancer said " " ( because specifically I remember temporarily convincing Gandydancer for a day to my side of this argument by using the analogy of Obama's abortion comment that pregnancy is " punishment " for sex on the talk page late last year )---> talk ) 19 : 51, 13 March 2012 ( UTC)
• :: : Interesting discussion, and even more interesting to see how only a very limited number of the " policy guidelines " discussed here made it over to the clothianidin talk page, where Gandydancer et al have been using primary research articles that fit their belief systems to try and debunk established scientific consensus expressed by global authorities regarding the as-yet unresolved effect of pesticides on pollinator health . ( for a brief synopsis see Topic III : Research to Identify Factors Affecting Honey Bee Health, Including Attempts to Recreate CCD Symptomology at USDA's 2010 Colony Collapse Disorder Report to Congress ) You see this same approach employed on many chemical articles, such as Neonicotinoids and imidacloprid, but also colony collapse disorder, which makes it look as if Wikipedia editors are themselves qualified secondary reviewers.