![]() | This page 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. |
Please refrain from making anally retentive reversions to Wikipedia, as you did to Andrew Hansen. Your reversions appear to be the work of a c*ckjock and have been undone. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Someone who thinks you're a humorless c*nt 23:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to draw your attention to Bangladesh portal. I have tried to address the concerns in earlier peer review and checked the portal against Featured portal criteria. Based on this I think it is proper time to push for Featured Portal status for Bangladesh Portal, which will be an important milestone for WikiProject Bangladesh. But to achieve this I need help from you. Please participate in the on-going discussion on the talk page and give me your valuable inputs.- Arman Aziz 03:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Recurring Dreams,
I seek your advice.
Where did I go wrong with the Glenn Milne / Walkley Awards material?
Why was the material I posted a copyright problem? The text was sourced by something like 7 well known newspaper and broadcast organisations in Australia. I don't see how the image violates copyright. Yes it is copyright, but Wikipedia has guidelines on that. I understood the image was within Wiki's guidelines.
The version you reverted to has only 1 citation.
Can I request your comment and guidance?
thanks, Pigmypossum 01:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thankyou. Timeshift 11:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi! A discussion has begun at WikiProject Crowded House's talk page regarding the future and goals of the WikiProject. Please feel free to contribute to this discussion in any way you see as being positive. -- linca linca 10:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
How do you get photos into the articles? -- Pezzar 06:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Recurring Dreams, I think you should mind your own business. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabbymc333 ( talk • contribs) on 18:45, 7 August 2007
Hi, can't we say that there is some controversy over gitmo. Obviously Hicks was probably tortured or otherwise interrogated - rightly or wrongly - but we must let people draw their own conclusions about the "confession". What do you think? -- Lancastria 11:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that you voted to keep the Wp:an/i and Wp:afd redirects at the Redirects for deletion page. I also voted to keep these redirect pages. I thought that if they were removed, then I would not automatically get to the pages I was looking for if I happened to type all lowercase letters, which would be pretty inconvenient. However, it turns out I was wrong. The software will automatically send someone to the appropriate page, even if they type all lowercase, and even if the redirect pages are deleted. It's just like a redirect, but without the redirect page. Deleting them will remove needless clutter in mainspace searches. With this knowledge, I wonder if you might consider changing your vote to delete. Thanks, and have a good day. Nick Graves 18:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
McDonalds, maybe? [1] LOL Orderinchaos 07:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Recurring Dreams. I come for advice, as I'm relatively new to Wikipedia. The Request For Comment has resulted in a comment. That lots of FACT tags are deplorable. I won't use them again on that article!
The other issue, about quick deletion of new content received no response. Is that beyond the scope of RfC? One example I really hoped would get resolved was the Bob Hawke motion that one editor continually deletes, even though numerous other editors found it useful and notable. What should I do about that? How do I get someone to arbitrate on it? Are the options exhausted?
As you saw on the Discussion page, even quotes get deleted, such as the famous "We will decide" slogan. There were edit wars with people who thought it should not be there. Then it got deleted because someone didn't like the word "slogan". Only when you stepped in did the "deleters" step back.
It seems like a lost cause trying to add info to this article. What do you think? Am I wrong? Are the people who hit the delete button without prior discussion right? Thanks for considering this article. Cheers, Lester2 10:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
The authenticity appears to be verified by clicking WHOIS on the contribs page. Orderinchaos 08:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey. I saw your request over at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Requests and was wondering if you were still interested in either an admin coach or running at WP:RFA. I'd coach/nom you if you were still interested, just let me know which one. Wizardman 05:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it's a great idea to label journalists other than the extremists, but just for your info this might help. Alec ✉﹌ 0000 ۞ 12:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
Please refrain from making anally retentive reversions to Wikipedia, as you did to Andrew Hansen. Your reversions appear to be the work of a c*ckjock and have been undone. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Someone who thinks you're a humorless c*nt 23:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to draw your attention to Bangladesh portal. I have tried to address the concerns in earlier peer review and checked the portal against Featured portal criteria. Based on this I think it is proper time to push for Featured Portal status for Bangladesh Portal, which will be an important milestone for WikiProject Bangladesh. But to achieve this I need help from you. Please participate in the on-going discussion on the talk page and give me your valuable inputs.- Arman Aziz 03:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Recurring Dreams,
I seek your advice.
Where did I go wrong with the Glenn Milne / Walkley Awards material?
Why was the material I posted a copyright problem? The text was sourced by something like 7 well known newspaper and broadcast organisations in Australia. I don't see how the image violates copyright. Yes it is copyright, but Wikipedia has guidelines on that. I understood the image was within Wiki's guidelines.
The version you reverted to has only 1 citation.
Can I request your comment and guidance?
thanks, Pigmypossum 01:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thankyou. Timeshift 11:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi! A discussion has begun at WikiProject Crowded House's talk page regarding the future and goals of the WikiProject. Please feel free to contribute to this discussion in any way you see as being positive. -- linca linca 10:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
How do you get photos into the articles? -- Pezzar 06:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Recurring Dreams, I think you should mind your own business. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabbymc333 ( talk • contribs) on 18:45, 7 August 2007
Hi, can't we say that there is some controversy over gitmo. Obviously Hicks was probably tortured or otherwise interrogated - rightly or wrongly - but we must let people draw their own conclusions about the "confession". What do you think? -- Lancastria 11:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that you voted to keep the Wp:an/i and Wp:afd redirects at the Redirects for deletion page. I also voted to keep these redirect pages. I thought that if they were removed, then I would not automatically get to the pages I was looking for if I happened to type all lowercase letters, which would be pretty inconvenient. However, it turns out I was wrong. The software will automatically send someone to the appropriate page, even if they type all lowercase, and even if the redirect pages are deleted. It's just like a redirect, but without the redirect page. Deleting them will remove needless clutter in mainspace searches. With this knowledge, I wonder if you might consider changing your vote to delete. Thanks, and have a good day. Nick Graves 18:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
McDonalds, maybe? [1] LOL Orderinchaos 07:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Recurring Dreams. I come for advice, as I'm relatively new to Wikipedia. The Request For Comment has resulted in a comment. That lots of FACT tags are deplorable. I won't use them again on that article!
The other issue, about quick deletion of new content received no response. Is that beyond the scope of RfC? One example I really hoped would get resolved was the Bob Hawke motion that one editor continually deletes, even though numerous other editors found it useful and notable. What should I do about that? How do I get someone to arbitrate on it? Are the options exhausted?
As you saw on the Discussion page, even quotes get deleted, such as the famous "We will decide" slogan. There were edit wars with people who thought it should not be there. Then it got deleted because someone didn't like the word "slogan". Only when you stepped in did the "deleters" step back.
It seems like a lost cause trying to add info to this article. What do you think? Am I wrong? Are the people who hit the delete button without prior discussion right? Thanks for considering this article. Cheers, Lester2 10:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
The authenticity appears to be verified by clicking WHOIS on the contribs page. Orderinchaos 08:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey. I saw your request over at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Requests and was wondering if you were still interested in either an admin coach or running at WP:RFA. I'd coach/nom you if you were still interested, just let me know which one. Wizardman 05:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it's a great idea to label journalists other than the extremists, but just for your info this might help. Alec ✉﹌ 0000 ۞ 12:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)