User talk:120.142.53.58

Please stop edit warring, if you think it is an issue please put it on the talk page, if you continue to edit war i will bin you.. Bubba41102is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike an editor 13:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Slavery -- why your contribution keeps getting reverted
Because it's too simplistic, and reads like a 6th-grader's test answer. While the British played an important role in ending the Atlantic slave trade, slavery ended in a number of different ways, from the slaves in St. Domingue/Haiti ending it themselves via armed revolution, through the role of slaves in Cuba's Ten Years' War, through various emancipatory decrees in the Francophone, Hispanic, and Lusophone territories, to the American civil war. You are being reductive, overlooking a lot of history, and writing poorly. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:07, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Great points. But rather than put them in you would rather lock the pages after repeatedly reverting me for no reason, and censor my original point? How fishy is that? 120.142.53.58 (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * http://therightstuff.biz/2015/05/30/calling-all-writers-operation-irrational-wiki/ 120.142.53.58 (talk) 13:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * "For no reason" apparently means explicitly given reasons. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 13:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

(cur | prev) 13:07, 1 June 2015‎ AgingHippie (Talk | contribs)‎ m. . (0)‎ . . (Protected "Slavery": Counter-productive edit warring (‎[edit=autoconfirmed] (expires 13:07, 8 June 2015 (UTC)) ‎[move=autoconfirmed] (expires 13:07, 8 June 2015 (UTC))))

(cur | prev) 13:07, 1 June 2015‎ AgingHippie (Talk | contribs)‎ m. . (-245)‎ . . (Reverted edits by 120.142.53.58 (talk) to last revision by AgingHippie) [reversion with no reason]

(cur | prev) 13:03, 1 June 2015‎ 120.142.53.58 (Talk)‎. . (+245)‎ . . (Undo revision 1474755 by AgingHippie (talk) No reason given. I have expanded the section. #Ijusthatewhitepeople)

(cur | prev) 13:02, 1 June 2015‎ AgingHippie (Talk | contribs)‎ m. . (-245)‎ . . (Reverted edits by 120.142.53.58 (talk) to last revision by Bubba41102) [reversion with no reason]

(cur | prev) 13:00, 1 June 2015‎ 120.142.53.58 (Talk)‎. . (+245)‎ . . (Undo revision 1474749 by Bubba41102 (talk) No reason given for reversion)

(cur | prev) 12:59, 1 June 2015‎ Bubba41102 (Talk | contribs)‎ m. . (-245)‎ . . (Reverted edits by 120.142.53.58 (talk) to last revision by Bubba41102) [reversion with no reason]

(cur | prev) 12:58, 1 June 2015‎ 120.142.53.58 (Talk)‎. . (+245)‎ . . (Undo revision 1474745 by Bubba41102 (talk)) [expanded section 3x]

(cur | prev) 12:53, 1 June 2015‎ Bubba41102 (Talk | contribs)‎. . (-92)‎ . . (Undo revision 1474743 by 120.142.53.58 (talk) we dont normally have sections with one sentence in them, expand.)

Liar 120.142.53.58 (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Just because we didn't provide a reason doesn't mean we don't have one. And puh-lease, saying that Britain single-handedly ended slavery is far more wrong than saying the US singlehandedly won WWII.  It's propoganda pure and simple; the British did do some stuff in trying to end slavery, but seemed to have no problem with establishing Apartheid and other horrific systems in their colonies Empire.  Also, you know the current argument that "the US supports slavery because we import cocoa"?  By that same logic, Britain supported slavery by buying American cotton. CorruptUser (talk) 14:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)