User talk:Nosxalc

I just noticed that he had already reverted you once, so I figured he doesn't want it. John Reaves (talk) 19:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably leave it on my talk page until I archived it. John Reaves (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Torchwood sewers[edit]

Please stop removing this from the article.--Rambutan (talk) 09:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that you very nearly broke the three-revert rule, which bans you from re-editing something more than three times in 24hrs. Please be careful. I've added a less speculatory version back into both articles.--12:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The civility policy suggests - not requires - that you respond, possibly apologising for your rudeness, and expressing your support/opposition to the new version of the note.--Rambutan (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't really an apology, it was a defence and an insult (I'm over-sensitive for calling a message that said, rather brusquely, "Stop doing something"). About the note itself, the connection to the episode is the sewers in 1930s New York. That's a fairly close connection!--Rambutan (talk) 15:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that would be dull and irrelevant. The sewer connection is what really makes that note (so to speak). As for the insult, you did. I was insulted, and you're not in a position to argue with my emotions, just as I can't argue with yours. Fair?--Rambutan (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with your "exact" point that it was dull. So, it's now interesting, relevant, fine and accepted by other Wikipedia editors. Excellent! Now, I'm afraid, I don't have any more time to waste on this ridiculous affair.--Rambutan (talk) 15:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I won't.--Rambutan (talk) 15:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which dictionary is it in?--Rambutan (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, it isn't. The Oxford English Dictionary lists a noun "nevermind", meaning a matter of interest or relevance, but your "nevermind" was a verb.--Rambutan (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I may be anti-social, but at least I say please and thankyou, and don't complain of over-sensitivity when my blatant rudeness is pointed out. You mis-spelt "feud", and also mis-interpreted my action in looking up the definition. I am entitled to waste my own time if I so wish, and if you make a clear statement about a word being genuine, you should at least check that the statement is true before making it.--Rambutan (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sign your posts on talkpages. That's policy. Now, I'm not using Wikipedia as a battleground, and if you just shut up I couldn't be arguing with you. You could have stayed quiet after I pointed out that nevermind wasn't a word... you could have stayed quiet after I said that I didn't want to waste more of my (frankly very valuble) time on this absurd discussion. You continued entering into dialogue with me - and very stupid dialogue it was too! This is why I'm not going to pay attention to your warning - which you simply made, and isn't real.--Rambutan (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relpy[edit]

Hi, I'd suggest taking Rambutan's advice, even though s/he is acting like a jerk, s/he is right. John Reaves (talk) 17:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Let it rest". No.--Rambutan (talk) 09:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you've slightly misunderstood something. John cannot get me in trouble, because I haven't breached any policy or guideline. I'd rather you didn't drag yourself into this as well, but I respect that you're allowed to if you so wish.--Rambutan (talk) 07:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MRI scanner[edit]

Hi, I've removed your note, as it must have a reliable source to be on Wikipedia.--Rambutan (talk) 07:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]