![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | → | Archive 40 |
![]() |
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you very much for your positive comments about me, I respect you and your contributions to this project and coming from you that means a lot. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 03:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Take a look on this page again, mainly on the last comments. Canniba loki 04:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Would you mind commenting at my editor review? I'd like some comments from the uninvolved, too. — §unday { Q} 15:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 37 | 15 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 05:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
SynMag.jpg Danke. Syn ergy 06:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind me responding to comments on the FLC. If my fixes or comments aren't accurate or pertinent, feel free to override them. I promise I won't get offended. :) - Yohhans talk 17:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Aww... You don't like my writing? I am hurt. :( See the sad face? Yeah. That's me. Hurt. - Yohhans talk 03:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
For future reference, the other half of this discussion can be found here.
The reference style in any given article is determined by what is established and frequently used by the primary editor or editors. On Heavy metal music we don't use the reference templates because we find them cumbersome and we're fine just typing out and formatting the refs by hand. There's no preferred reference style on Wikipedia; what's important is that whatever reference style is decided on in a given article is used consistently throughout. Basically, it's best not to change an article's style of referencing from top to bottom if there already is a reference style in place. It's unnecessary and can be a pain to the editors who work on the page regularly. WesleyDodds ( talk) 03:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Jennavecia, what you are saying is simply false. Mary Shelley, The Garden of Earthly Delights, Æthelbald of Mercia, and Catherine de' Medici to name but a few FA that dont used this needless metadata. I think its a bit rich to turn up out of nowhere on an article as heavily watched and edited as this, and start flinging templates without a word on talk, and then attack one of the origional authors (I'm another) when he objects. I also think that after attacking origional author to come out with In fact, I prefer manual referencing, as you prefer. However...templates are required, is well: baffeling unless you suscribe to a theory that you are want to have your cake and eat it ie appeal to both sides. And then return on your 7th post to the origional author with the conceated The referencing is, in my opinion, too sloppy for an FA....well thats quite something. See here why we don't use metadata on these articles, and why we would prefer to leave it sloppy [1]. Ceoil sláinte 19:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
You missed the whole point so I'm going to drop you as a person worth knowing. I'll leave you with this: heard of Hubris: I'm not repentant, not so much as an explanation, As an experienced editor; That wasn't you, though, so don't worry about it. My impression is of a victim complex, and painful self regard. Which or wheather it is, it's not nice, and I'm backing away slowley. Bye. Ceoil sláinte 18:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
havy medal some makes me mad but then agin who doesent need to play it rilly loud in their car so we all can hear it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterk7 ( talk • contribs) 05:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jenna! I need your help here on this image file → Image:120Sqn shoulder patch (new).jpg, I made a critical mistake naming it as new during upload. It is in fact an old squadron patch... so if it doesn't take up too much of your time, could you please change the words from "(new)" to "(old)"? Thanks! -- Dave1185 ( talk) 15:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
If you are interested in co-working on APC, I would be interested. I have been focusing on 'vandal fighting' lately - given my denial for rollback, LOL, but I started here as a writer, so it's jello if you want to let me know about a tag-team effort. Without being a jackass, and trying to mean no offense, I was looking at the above stuff, and maybe the discussion page on the article is best. Don't shoot the messenger. Actually, I'm not the messenger, just thought I might be able to monopolize your time without the above stuff. In no way am I trying to trivialize it. Thanks JV or Jenna. Whichever you prefer. :] XF Law talk at me 06:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Most of my edits were undone. Can you take the time to look at them. I think they were good edits. I know it is an older article, but I was just trying to edit what I know, and grammatically, the edits were good. Are there people that watchlist this for fear of changes? [PS the UT SAID DGAF, so I did that.] XF Law talk at me 10:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
*huggles* -- Gurch ( talk) 11:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
That's very true. Jennavecia (Talk) 17:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, how's this for uber-cuteness? XD -- Dave1185 ( talk) 21:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
He recreated it, and his sock puppets need burning too. — Realist 2 16:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm beginning to feel like I'm ploughing a lonely furrow with the GA Sweeps Reviews. Do you think I'm wasting my time with them? -- Malleus Fatuorum ( talk) 23:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Sigh. There was nothing in my proposal that was not well thought-out. It was just a review and a suggestion. It made perfect sense. He imposed his own length. Without prior knowledge of undisclosed e-mails between Steve and Arb Com there was no ban length, just the suggestion of a break being preferred. His WB enforcer was removed so he could edit his talk page and request a review be looked into. There was no one, that I recall, stating that a year was not long enough. Likewise, there was no one saying that a full year was needed, let alone that Arb Com had specified a one year length. A js break set by the individual is not the same as a ban, and he wasn't blocked until recently. That's Arb Com's fault. If they made this crystal clear, then there would not be so many holes in the final decision. And even fewer admins obfuscating it. Syn ergy 18:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for
owning my userpage! Was very kind of you :)
Ryan has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey, thanks for helping to deal with the anonymous Israeli. Much appreciated. – Pee Jay 21:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I'm a huge fan. How do I message you? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.128.20.43 ( talk) 21:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Seems like most of the vandalism on Proposed bailout of United States financial system is coming from IPs. Can we try semi-protection first? Ronnotel ( talk) 21:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
←You seemed the last one I'd imagine joining Gurch's Legion. Careful with Huggle at the moment as it's very unstable (hence this header on all the related pages) and will do a lot of things you don't expect. – iride scent 22:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Helllooo Jennavecia!
I have a question for an administrator type:
I have been doing some vandalism fighting/guidance on the article George S. Parker High School. I thought things were OK, and today I arrive to find that there is a new editor at work on the article: User:LonelyBacon. I could care less, but this account has been into vandalism, and given that, I would rather not have them doing that.
So, the question is: does this constitute enough of a violation of WP:USERNAME to file a report, or am I just crazy. The policy did not appear clear enough to me, so I thought I would ask first.
Any help would be appreciated. I will keep an eye on this page; no need to go anywhere else. Thanks! LonelyBeacon ( talk) 22:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Seriously kidding, I'm in a goofy mood. Anyway, you slapped a 1-day protection on Proposed bailout of United States financial system (2008); however, given that it failed it'll probably be getting a lot of attention. I was just wondering if you'd be ok with a suggestion (and this is one of the only times I think I'll ask for this) for me to extend the protection to, say, a month. Whatcha think?
P.S. I would've done this on IRC but apparently you just evaded me.
Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
In late 2007 (last year), I went for a non-existent username, but now I have registered. I have also told ArielGold. - Porchcrop ( talk| contributions) 02:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Damn huggle! -- Closedmouth ( talk) 02:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
dear jennavecia i know what i did to hats and germany was wrong but what did i do to september we are studing the romans in school and i wrote what i lurand in school down it was right and true. my appolage for the tone of this letter i don't know if this the right to posted this i did not know where too . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterk7 ( talk • contribs) 05:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I was showing a friend about Wikipedia. We worked on Lucky D's, as an article. I was trying to show him WPV and WPN, but in the mean time, it sort of was killed. Lucky D's is notable for being a bar as well as a hostel in North America. I leavened my lesson, but I'm trying to teach him how to be a good editor, and he's had an account longer than me. Can you (if you have time) help us make the article better? There is a good chance that the bar/hostel merits some amount of notariaty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XF Law ( talk • contribs) 12:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I need greater than 9000 edits for rollback, or I'm getting payled some how... XF Law talk at me 15:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
ok i suck ass at speling and gramer and puncation that is why thank you for the infomation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterk7 ( talk • contribs) 23:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
"My watchlist" page in es:wiki ("Lista de seguimiento") has been deleted by you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Watchlist
Why??
— Cesar Tort 16:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello.
Same for me.
Euratom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.101.168.188 ( talk) 16:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Same for my watchlist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Watchlist Apparently you have removed it, how can I recover it againg?-- 82.158.41.91 ( talk) 16:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC) (user: Tito_64 in Spanish wikipedia)
![]() |
The Destroyer of the Wiki Barnstar | |
For apparently (allegedly) destroying all watchlists in all languages... :) PeterSymonds (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC) |
--Well it can't be proven yet, but here's your barnstar! PeterSymonds (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
You have been sentenced to the Village Stocks | |
For accidentally deleting a vital component of the watchlist. How? God knows. But you did it :P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 18:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC) |
Do you know if there is any truth to this? The Google does nothing. the skomorokh 18:33, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
–
iride
scent
21:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
[3]. Didn't know if you got this, but this guy was REAL determined to leave you a message at the wrong place. Toodles... -- Jayron32. talk. contribs 23:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh, they just don't know how allowing even a little OR for "context" will destroy controversial articles. The section that got put in and taken out [4] says:
In some cases, supplementary information from generic sources that cover a broader subject area than the specific article topic may be deemed to add value to an article, in order to clarify places, people or things mentioned in the article. For example, an editor might want to add a detail from a reliable source that describes the historical context in which the subject of an article lived, even though the cited source does not mention the article subject, or mention a contrasting mainstream view from a generic source in an article on a fringe topic. As long as the contextual information thus added only constitutes a minor portion of the section or article concerned, this is considered uncontroversial and acceptable.
And in addition, other changes, which I reverted, make OR more acceptable [5]. You changed your username (: —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 23:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | → | Archive 40 |
![]() |
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you very much for your positive comments about me, I respect you and your contributions to this project and coming from you that means a lot. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 03:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Take a look on this page again, mainly on the last comments. Canniba loki 04:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Would you mind commenting at my editor review? I'd like some comments from the uninvolved, too. — §unday { Q} 15:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 37 | 15 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 05:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
SynMag.jpg Danke. Syn ergy 06:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind me responding to comments on the FLC. If my fixes or comments aren't accurate or pertinent, feel free to override them. I promise I won't get offended. :) - Yohhans talk 17:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Aww... You don't like my writing? I am hurt. :( See the sad face? Yeah. That's me. Hurt. - Yohhans talk 03:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
For future reference, the other half of this discussion can be found here.
The reference style in any given article is determined by what is established and frequently used by the primary editor or editors. On Heavy metal music we don't use the reference templates because we find them cumbersome and we're fine just typing out and formatting the refs by hand. There's no preferred reference style on Wikipedia; what's important is that whatever reference style is decided on in a given article is used consistently throughout. Basically, it's best not to change an article's style of referencing from top to bottom if there already is a reference style in place. It's unnecessary and can be a pain to the editors who work on the page regularly. WesleyDodds ( talk) 03:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Jennavecia, what you are saying is simply false. Mary Shelley, The Garden of Earthly Delights, Æthelbald of Mercia, and Catherine de' Medici to name but a few FA that dont used this needless metadata. I think its a bit rich to turn up out of nowhere on an article as heavily watched and edited as this, and start flinging templates without a word on talk, and then attack one of the origional authors (I'm another) when he objects. I also think that after attacking origional author to come out with In fact, I prefer manual referencing, as you prefer. However...templates are required, is well: baffeling unless you suscribe to a theory that you are want to have your cake and eat it ie appeal to both sides. And then return on your 7th post to the origional author with the conceated The referencing is, in my opinion, too sloppy for an FA....well thats quite something. See here why we don't use metadata on these articles, and why we would prefer to leave it sloppy [1]. Ceoil sláinte 19:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
You missed the whole point so I'm going to drop you as a person worth knowing. I'll leave you with this: heard of Hubris: I'm not repentant, not so much as an explanation, As an experienced editor; That wasn't you, though, so don't worry about it. My impression is of a victim complex, and painful self regard. Which or wheather it is, it's not nice, and I'm backing away slowley. Bye. Ceoil sláinte 18:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
havy medal some makes me mad but then agin who doesent need to play it rilly loud in their car so we all can hear it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterk7 ( talk • contribs) 05:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jenna! I need your help here on this image file → Image:120Sqn shoulder patch (new).jpg, I made a critical mistake naming it as new during upload. It is in fact an old squadron patch... so if it doesn't take up too much of your time, could you please change the words from "(new)" to "(old)"? Thanks! -- Dave1185 ( talk) 15:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
If you are interested in co-working on APC, I would be interested. I have been focusing on 'vandal fighting' lately - given my denial for rollback, LOL, but I started here as a writer, so it's jello if you want to let me know about a tag-team effort. Without being a jackass, and trying to mean no offense, I was looking at the above stuff, and maybe the discussion page on the article is best. Don't shoot the messenger. Actually, I'm not the messenger, just thought I might be able to monopolize your time without the above stuff. In no way am I trying to trivialize it. Thanks JV or Jenna. Whichever you prefer. :] XF Law talk at me 06:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Most of my edits were undone. Can you take the time to look at them. I think they were good edits. I know it is an older article, but I was just trying to edit what I know, and grammatically, the edits were good. Are there people that watchlist this for fear of changes? [PS the UT SAID DGAF, so I did that.] XF Law talk at me 10:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
*huggles* -- Gurch ( talk) 11:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
That's very true. Jennavecia (Talk) 17:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, how's this for uber-cuteness? XD -- Dave1185 ( talk) 21:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
He recreated it, and his sock puppets need burning too. — Realist 2 16:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm beginning to feel like I'm ploughing a lonely furrow with the GA Sweeps Reviews. Do you think I'm wasting my time with them? -- Malleus Fatuorum ( talk) 23:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Sigh. There was nothing in my proposal that was not well thought-out. It was just a review and a suggestion. It made perfect sense. He imposed his own length. Without prior knowledge of undisclosed e-mails between Steve and Arb Com there was no ban length, just the suggestion of a break being preferred. His WB enforcer was removed so he could edit his talk page and request a review be looked into. There was no one, that I recall, stating that a year was not long enough. Likewise, there was no one saying that a full year was needed, let alone that Arb Com had specified a one year length. A js break set by the individual is not the same as a ban, and he wasn't blocked until recently. That's Arb Com's fault. If they made this crystal clear, then there would not be so many holes in the final decision. And even fewer admins obfuscating it. Syn ergy 18:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for
owning my userpage! Was very kind of you :)
Ryan has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey, thanks for helping to deal with the anonymous Israeli. Much appreciated. – Pee Jay 21:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I'm a huge fan. How do I message you? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.128.20.43 ( talk) 21:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Seems like most of the vandalism on Proposed bailout of United States financial system is coming from IPs. Can we try semi-protection first? Ronnotel ( talk) 21:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
←You seemed the last one I'd imagine joining Gurch's Legion. Careful with Huggle at the moment as it's very unstable (hence this header on all the related pages) and will do a lot of things you don't expect. – iride scent 22:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Helllooo Jennavecia!
I have a question for an administrator type:
I have been doing some vandalism fighting/guidance on the article George S. Parker High School. I thought things were OK, and today I arrive to find that there is a new editor at work on the article: User:LonelyBacon. I could care less, but this account has been into vandalism, and given that, I would rather not have them doing that.
So, the question is: does this constitute enough of a violation of WP:USERNAME to file a report, or am I just crazy. The policy did not appear clear enough to me, so I thought I would ask first.
Any help would be appreciated. I will keep an eye on this page; no need to go anywhere else. Thanks! LonelyBeacon ( talk) 22:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Seriously kidding, I'm in a goofy mood. Anyway, you slapped a 1-day protection on Proposed bailout of United States financial system (2008); however, given that it failed it'll probably be getting a lot of attention. I was just wondering if you'd be ok with a suggestion (and this is one of the only times I think I'll ask for this) for me to extend the protection to, say, a month. Whatcha think?
P.S. I would've done this on IRC but apparently you just evaded me.
Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
In late 2007 (last year), I went for a non-existent username, but now I have registered. I have also told ArielGold. - Porchcrop ( talk| contributions) 02:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Damn huggle! -- Closedmouth ( talk) 02:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
dear jennavecia i know what i did to hats and germany was wrong but what did i do to september we are studing the romans in school and i wrote what i lurand in school down it was right and true. my appolage for the tone of this letter i don't know if this the right to posted this i did not know where too . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterk7 ( talk • contribs) 05:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I was showing a friend about Wikipedia. We worked on Lucky D's, as an article. I was trying to show him WPV and WPN, but in the mean time, it sort of was killed. Lucky D's is notable for being a bar as well as a hostel in North America. I leavened my lesson, but I'm trying to teach him how to be a good editor, and he's had an account longer than me. Can you (if you have time) help us make the article better? There is a good chance that the bar/hostel merits some amount of notariaty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XF Law ( talk • contribs) 12:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I need greater than 9000 edits for rollback, or I'm getting payled some how... XF Law talk at me 15:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
ok i suck ass at speling and gramer and puncation that is why thank you for the infomation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterk7 ( talk • contribs) 23:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
"My watchlist" page in es:wiki ("Lista de seguimiento") has been deleted by you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Watchlist
Why??
— Cesar Tort 16:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello.
Same for me.
Euratom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.101.168.188 ( talk) 16:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Same for my watchlist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Watchlist Apparently you have removed it, how can I recover it againg?-- 82.158.41.91 ( talk) 16:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC) (user: Tito_64 in Spanish wikipedia)
![]() |
The Destroyer of the Wiki Barnstar | |
For apparently (allegedly) destroying all watchlists in all languages... :) PeterSymonds (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC) |
--Well it can't be proven yet, but here's your barnstar! PeterSymonds (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
You have been sentenced to the Village Stocks | |
For accidentally deleting a vital component of the watchlist. How? God knows. But you did it :P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 18:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC) |
Do you know if there is any truth to this? The Google does nothing. the skomorokh 18:33, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
–
iride
scent
21:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
[3]. Didn't know if you got this, but this guy was REAL determined to leave you a message at the wrong place. Toodles... -- Jayron32. talk. contribs 23:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh, they just don't know how allowing even a little OR for "context" will destroy controversial articles. The section that got put in and taken out [4] says:
In some cases, supplementary information from generic sources that cover a broader subject area than the specific article topic may be deemed to add value to an article, in order to clarify places, people or things mentioned in the article. For example, an editor might want to add a detail from a reliable source that describes the historical context in which the subject of an article lived, even though the cited source does not mention the article subject, or mention a contrasting mainstream view from a generic source in an article on a fringe topic. As long as the contextual information thus added only constitutes a minor portion of the section or article concerned, this is considered uncontroversial and acceptable.
And in addition, other changes, which I reverted, make OR more acceptable [5]. You changed your username (: —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 23:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)