23:3623:36, 14 April 2009diffhist−305
Fahrenheit 9/11 controversies
I will restore the relevant section, but your utter contempt for what I have said has made me unwilling to slowly fix it. It is easier to simply undo, then re-add your useful material
00:0000:00, 30 March 2009diffhist−2
Most Phallic Building contest
Erected is the more grammatically correct. You just dislike it because of the double meaning. It remains the most appropriate word to use, so that'll be the one that stays.
02:0902:09, 18 December 2008diffhist−58
Fahrenheit 9/11 controversies
You're the one who is assuming that balance exists. You've provided no evidence this is true. The current version may just reflect reality. If not, get some sources. Are you trying to get banned?
01:4501:45, 17 December 2008diffhist−23
Fahrenheit 9/11 controversies
Sorry, but you can't assert by yourself that the section DGG said was fine is unbalanced. Instrad of tagging it, just go get some sources. And remember, try to make it relevant to the controversy
01:2601:26, 13 December 2008diffhist−35
Fahrenheit 9/11 controversies
Wikipedia rules are not something you make up. You've proposed no alternative text, you were in the minority to begin with,and you haven't addressed the new text on the talk page. 3R warning methinks
02:5602:56, 7 December 2008diffhist−35
Fahrenheit 9/11 controversies
Sorry, but you need to establish a real objection, not just vague complaints. You're also at 3R now, and the article should go back to the initial consensus article when there is a deadlock.