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 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Can you comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Media_franchises#What_belongs_in_this_project.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 03:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
You don't know enough about the subject to be making merges. In ictu oculi ( talk) 09:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Li (surname), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yi ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't really see the point of orphaning Template:U. S. Network Shows footer unless there is some overhauling of the underlying templates. I think they are more informative to the reader linked by this template.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 04:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
No it isn't, because it takes you away from the articles, not to mention falling foul of the inclusion/transclusion rules. Read and digest the guidelines again. This is not what navboxes are intended for... -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 22:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
A navigation template is a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles. Editing of a navigation template is done in a central place, the template page.The emphasis is mine, but navboxes are not articles. As you can see, the guidelines pretty much already show that they are intended only to link articles, and the template space is used for editing, they just could do with being more explicit. -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 13:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Using such a long time, and if you want to remove, please get consensus.-- Qa003qa003 ( talk) 14:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
You've really got a talent for nitpicking. - Zanhe ( talk) 23:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
You blanked a bunch of templates that were under nomination at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_June_13#Template:GuldbaggeAwardBestFilm_footer under the presumption that a delete closure was inevitable. The debate was closed as no consensus. However, once you blanked them, they were deleted at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_June_20 in a routine closure. Now, Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Actress Award, Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Actor Award, Template:Golden Globe Award for Best Miniseries or Television Film and others seem inconseistent with the other templates.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you're name at the talk page for WP:Article titles and was wondering if you could comment at this discussion regarding a website's trademarked stylization. Dan56 ( talk) 22:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Do not redirect. The latter template is likely to be a huge template when I am done. It will serve a different purpose than the focussed one.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 04:16, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Regarding
Template:Andrzej Żuławski: I know (and support) that navboxes shouldn't show red links. That's why that template uses <noinclude>...</noinclude>
and an accompanying explanation. This method will not show red links in the template's transclusions, thus satisfying
WP:NAVBOX. It provides a convenient mechanism to 1) arrive at common names for future articles; 2) provide a complete list of the director's œuvre, thus satisfying
WP:REDYES; 3) simplify the correct chronological addition of articles when they get written. Hiding the missing titles in HTML comments achieves only #3. I suggest to restore the version with the complete list. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk)
11:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
For this - I couldn't find that template *d'oh* Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Through this way, I inform there is a discussion about partially disambiguated titles, known as " PDABs". This subguide of WP:D was approved at VPP, in a discussion you participated. Note there was a discussion of PDAB at WT:D the last weeks (everything is explained in the RFC). You are welcome to give ideas about the future of this guideline at WT:D. Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:35, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Please revisit THIS discussion. Thanks. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
You should probably do all the Emmy ones now while they are in season and people will be looking at the pages more closely.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ WP:FOUR/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:WAWARD) 11:24, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Fine, you don't think it should be in the intro. And fine, you feel so strongly about it that you're willing to click the undo button twice. Meanwhile, I'm trying to improve the information quality of Wikipedia.
If you can't stand that info being in the intro, move it out of the intro. Or open a discussion on the Talk page. Or leave a message on my Talk page saying what you think could be improved in my edit.
But please don't just click revert, revert. We need to grow the editing community. That sort of attitude doesn't drive me away (I'm not saying that's your intention). I've been here ten years and I've a thick skin. But others would find your behaviour antisocial and they might leave or be less enthusiastic about contributing to Wikipedia. Gronky ( talk) 12:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Those templates were already split off from a single template in 2009 after an extensive discussion to establish consensus and the current format (including an RFC at the WikiProject Video Games), which resulted in the current format. You're welcome to start up a new discussion and RFC at the project, but any sweeping changes like this are going to require a new consensus generated. -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 02:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey dude I don't freaking criticize your edits and say "its poorly worded". User:TreCoolGuy
Hi Robsinden! FYI - Batman vs. Superman was an article at the time I added the links to the navbox templates. It was changed to a redirect afterwards. Happy editing! GoingBatty ( talk) 15:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Images of box sets violate copyright now? Would it be any different if a picture of a box set was taken and uploaded on Wikipedia by a user? Would that classify as a free file? I honestly fail to see the issue here.-- DesignDeath ( talk) 11:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
With respects Rob, I have declined your speedy on Pocket Gangsters. While it is an WP:UGLY article, sources are available and any sense of advert is addressable. See its talk page. Best, Schmidt, Michael Q. 01:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Robsinden. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.
We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.
Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 22:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
I noticed that, in this diff, you deleted the section on Wikipedia coverage from the Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage article. I encourage you to discuss this issue further on the talk page page as some editors may disagree with its removal. Thank you. CaseyPenk ( talk) 20:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Aoidh ( talk) (formerly User:SudoGhost) 20:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
to help the admin see that these footer templates are no longer used, you can perform a 'null edit' on each article shown in 'what links here'. basically, you just open up the article, do nothing, then save the article, which will clear it from the list. I have been doing this for you on the ones that I see after seeing an admin reject your CSD since it did not look like the template was unused. but, I don't have time to do all of them. thank you. Frietjes ( talk) 15:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Two people doesn't make a consensus. There should have been a discussion with others before you started fucking around the templates.-- TheMovieBuff ( talk) 17:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
You're ridiculous.-- TheMovieBuff ( talk) 17:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
That redirect will just be there for a month - an argument was made its not a good redirect so I wanted to see how many ppl actually click on it daily.-- Obi-Wan Kenobi ( talk) 16:27, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see you removed the ref, I was suprised it hadnt happened previous! Its a ref for the authors talking about thier ideas, I added it as it shows they believe it to be an Irish sitcom, but the lead has been edit warred to bits lately, I am surprised it lasted this long. Shows that not many read the refs! Best leave it out for now anyhow. Murry1975 ( talk) 20:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
The vast majority of English-language sources call it Le Cercle Rouge. Film Fan 14:24, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Robsinden. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Les enfants terribles (film), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (France & French-related)#Works of art, cited at WP:NCCAPS. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 02:40, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Death Note question". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 17:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
To be fair to our readers, I think a temporary redirect to either J.K. Rowling or the article on the 2001 book " Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" by that author (and where this adaptation is already written about), is a valid consideration. The arguments about how the film topic might become supremely notable have a bit of merit, but I think it logical that we send readers for now to where it makes sense under policy, guideline and essay to keep readers informed. What'cha think? Schmidt, Michael Q. 02:20, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough we can leave the page as Hammersmith Apollo - it is a more recognisable name. But can we please put in the new corporate logo for the Apollo? As the old one you have restored to the page is no longer in use and I have been requested to remove it by both parties in ownership of the Eventim Apollo. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adfrench41 ( talk • contribs) 11:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
I was going to do the same thing once the AFD was closed, but you beat me to it . Schmidt, Michael Q. 17:41, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tuva Novotny, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Czech ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:52, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm very much hoping it won't come to this, but if the editor in question persists in their feeling that the section should be named Trivia and is doing it across multiple articles then an ANI case may be warranted. Hopefully we can talk them down on Soylent Green and it won't be an issue.
Could you have a look at Development of Jurassic World. I've seen you active in similar cases. I raised the issue of WP:NFF there, but the editors involved think it doesn't apply. 202.81.242.216 ( talk) 03:33, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
— Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 17:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey there Robsinden. It's totally fine to notify relevant WikiProjects about ongoing discussions, as with your recent interest in Template:Alfred Hitchcock, but be sure to word the notice neutrally, so as to avoid any semblance of canvassing (see "Campaigning" on that page). Ibadibam ( talk) 18:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, WP:Existing doesn't say anything about list entries. I think you're referring to "Avoid repeating links to the same article within a template", which is in a different section. However, I understand that List of Coronation Street characters performs the same function, and the template is just for articles, not sections within the same articles, and all the articles they linked to are included in the "lists of characters" part of the template. It's just that it's always been the way it was (not a good excuse) and people will wonder where certain characters currently appearing in the show are (and will probably try to re-insert them). Just letting you know that I now understand, but also my reasons for the original revert. There are other templates that do this. – anemone projectors– 16:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:The Rolling Stones albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Rob Sinden ( talk) 13:29, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
it would be great if you could fix the double redirects (e.g., the redirects to the templates you redirect). I just fixed these. Frietjes ( talk) 16:12, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
— Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 16:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
If you want to edit war, go ahead and keep reverting: everyone else is managing to discuss it like adults on the talk page. Perhaps you ought to try that out instead of edit warring? - SchroCat ( talk) 14:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Well done for your edit warring. Now grow up and join in the conversation and stop being such a WP:DICK. - SchroCat ( talk) 14:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of low-budget zombie films may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 12:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Robsiden, I'm Andy'sedits, in case my signature goes wrong. I'm sorry you thougth I disregarded your comment and instructions you left on my talk page. I saw your post about signatures, and I already had one from another person. I forgot to comment there about makign hte so that was why I removed yours without coming here to mention it. I haven't worked out the signature with the 'talk' & auto link,. I read in instructions to do the four ~ as the signature or use the pencil icon. I know htere is no excuse, but I can only think the reason was becuse I left a space between last . and putting the signature. I am a fan of Zombie films, and take the topic seriously, I would only make contribution comment knowing there is relaible propper source to back it up. would make sure I'd qualify if something is my personal opinion only. Hope you excuse the tardiness of my reply.--Andys'edtits 12:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andys'edtits ( talk • contribs) Signature problem now fixed after teahouse assitance. All in settings!-- Andys'edtits ( talk) 13:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
As has been already said, you need an RfC if you want to delete/merge all these Chinese surnames. Doing it piecemeal through AfD (a) isn't going to work because AFD is based on notability, including non-English sources, (b) is treading a fine line heading towards disruptive and WP:POINTY - I will only comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Li Surname (郦). Please intitate a RFC. In ictu oculi ( talk) 12:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I have just lost five minutes work and source because of an edit conflict caused by you hovering over the article adding a "who" ... do you not have other areas of the encyclopedia to disrupt? In ictu oculi ( talk) 13:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Rob,
I will give you the fix up later but you sent a message to User talk:95.90.118.201 who I have just spent four weeks deleting incorrect comments about Esperanto across articles, particularly Hungarian ones, and had (this is a redlink´ Grin Report) deleted after PROD and AfD with lots of personal abuse. I deliberately stayed away. My notably sourced article at Beethoven's liver meanwhile was on the history log as POINTy which it was but the point is here is how you can write a stub reliably sourced in two minutes if you know how, and odd how mine stands in its own right but this is how you have a reliably sourced, notable article and the only PUSHPOV is to push the point of N, RS, V. We might not like that but we come here or we don't which is why I stayed away cos I couldn't be bothered with him.
I presume you removed a reference to Esperanto which he is always pushing, occasionally under other IPs. He has met his match in me because I and my wife User:Monkap have both studied it at university many years ago and it is useful in the study of lingustics (she being native in finno ugric and me in English) but to pretend it is used in real life is a nonsense. He put in that it is an offical langage in Hungary, which is not true, it is taught on linguistics courses and in the narrowesst sense of the word it is official in that you get one mark on your course for having studied it for three months. I pointed out that English is not an official language in England.
I am just warning you cos he is not exactly a troll but a pushpov. In the AfD, it says so called english si trew you say pushpov. Well pushpov is not English it is Wikipedia jargon. argot in french. I only speak jargon in Hungarian but I don't know the word for it. Si Trew ( talk) 03:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
I would prefer the description "Irish presenter on british television" because she has never presented any programmes on any Irish stations. 80.111.172.25 ( talk) 17:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, you recently moved a page that was at AfD ([Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Clover - Film]); when the discussion was closed as delete, the closing administrator ended up not deleting the actual article but instead the pagemove redirect. While the move was correct, could you either 1) refrain from performing pagemoves while the article is at AfD or 2) put a clear note on the discussion page that you moved it? (See WP:NOMOVE, as well.) Cheers, Ansh 6 6 6 04:17, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Li (surname) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
The MOS supersedes personal opinions. Please read WP:DTT before trying to undo months of hard work to sloppy 90s standards, and show a little respect for WP:WAI. Separate tables are better for navigation, one lengthy table is ugly and less accessible, especially for that many rows. Your opinions in the edit summary are purely subjective, whereas the MOS is a tried and tested set of standards. The split tables format has been there for over a year, without disruption – no need for you to start now. Ma®©usBritish{ chat} 14:22, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Looking for something similar, I had a look at
Spencer Tracy filmography and
Christopher Lee filmography. Other than the rowspan (which I purposely avoided when merging these tables), I fail to see how anything like this can break a screen reader. The plain and simple approach reduces the page load time dramatically. --
Rob Sinden (
talk)
15:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I've told you once already, WP:Filmography does not take priority over WP:MOS, as WikiProjects custom MOS are only meant to
And, regarding the split of the table into year-by-year sections is against
MOS:TABLES also "
Splitting lists and tables per summary style is advised against". --
Rob Sinden (
talk)
16:29, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
|
I know about WP:FILMRATING, but many readers who are unfamiliar with the Die Hard series would want to know about the ratings of those films since the fourth one, Live Free or Die Hard, was PG-13 while the others are R. BattleshipMan ( talk) 19:05, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Wikimedes has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{ subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{ subst:Kittynap}}
I was going to give you and In ictu oculi kittens after your first exchange at the latest RfC and got sidetracked. In ictu oculi still looks like he needs one, so here’s one for you too. (How and why would one feed a virtual kitten 3 times a day?)-- Wikimedes ( talk) 05:17, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
This user has contributed to Man of Steel (film) good articles on Wikipedia. |
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your editorial contributions to Man of Steel (film), which recently was promoted to WP:GA.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
See WP:BRD and use the talk page: do not just revert. Your edit was poor and against the consensus on the article, which was why it was reverted initially. - SchroCat ( talk) 09:20, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
You are involved in an edit war. Stop. Go to the talk page and DISCUSS. On the way there, you may wish to stop by WP:BRD and brush up on things. - SchroCat ( talk) 11:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Category:Carry On films crew members, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Your deletions at Gina Torres, Nathan Fillion, Alan Tudyk, Morena Baccarin, Adam Baldwin, Jewel Staite, Sean Maher, Summer Glau, and Ron Glass have all been reverted by me and another editor, due to false edit summaries and false deletion reasons. Care to explain yourself here, so there's just one central discussion?
-- Lexein ( talk) 21:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Rob Sinden be careful, going to Nymf page asking them to come and help out in the discussion is getting very close to WP:CANVASS as well as WP:Meat puppetry Both of which could get you a ban — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarty72 ( talk • contribs) 22:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Nathan Fillion. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please arrive on one location for your discussion, refrain from any further reverting and get this matter resolved. Your slow edit warring is disrupting this article and all the other Firefly-related articles where it's taking place. -- Drmargi ( talk) 14:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I see your editcount odometer just clicked over to 20,000. Got a screenshot. -- Lexein ( talk) 17:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello RS. When your discussion about actors in navboxes came up I couldn't for, the life of me, remember where the past discussions were. Well, as happens around here, I stumbled across it today while looking for something else. So the 2nd item here Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers/Consensus summaries might be what you are looking for. Other discussion might have supplanted this one but I cannot remember that happening. Another flaw with the A&F wikiproject is that we tend to discuss things but the consensus doesn't always get written into the MoS. I hope this is of help and my apologies if it isn't. MarnetteD | Talk 02:07, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prehysteria!, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom Williams ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:13, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Can you explain why did you merge some of the film award templates to a single navbox?-- Earthh ( talk) 14:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I've just divided the template in three sections. I think it's fine now. Thank you for your patience.-- Earthh ( talk) 16:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Great find, raised this at COIN. That clearly confirms my suspicions that there was promotional editing going on at Ace Hotel and Dubtitle (as well as the others, of course). Ace Hotel's article could be a brochure for them. Dougweller ( talk) 13:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
You recently renamed Remember not, Lord, our offences to Remember Not, Lord, Our Offences. Sorry, but every catalogue of Purcell's works does not use such capitalisation, the source text does not, and in general, Anglican choral anthems do not follow this rule. Please review.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 16:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
The Chicago Manual of Style, which is what our MOS is largely based on, has this to say: -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 09:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't care who's right but both of you must stop move-warring. A full discussion at WP:RM is needed. It was unwise of you, ColonelHenry, to get the page moved back on the basis that it was uncontroversial - it clearly was. It was unwise of you, Robsinden, to move it back again instead of using the proper channels for discussing disputed moves. Bencherlite Talk 12:12, 20 December 2013 (UTC) |
Re: [8]
So it seems to you. Define dismay (a word that I don't know). The image of the baby was criticised by Bencherlite as not relevant to the article, I acted on that. The title page of the score which the composer dedicated to his own father seems more relevant. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:02, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
ps: Define "correct". A correct name cannot be found by consensus, it simply is correct. An article can have only one name. That name can be found by consensus. If there are different names for the topic, why not show them? I would like especially to see with due weight the name chosen by the creator of the music which happens to be the preference of the creators of the article, the style in more than 90% of the sources used for the article. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Robsinden, I was asked to comment about the reverting at A Boy Was Born and elsewhere. I'm not familiar with all the arguments, but the way forward is to discuss on talk, or start an RfC if no consensus can be found. Continuing to revert, especially when you're changing a style preference, is not a good idea. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Your opinion is requested at Talk:List of original programs distributed by Netflix#Massive reverts without explanation. -- Lexein ( talk) 21:43, 24 December 2013 (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 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
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 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Can you comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Media_franchises#What_belongs_in_this_project.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 03:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
You don't know enough about the subject to be making merges. In ictu oculi ( talk) 09:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Li (surname), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yi ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't really see the point of orphaning Template:U. S. Network Shows footer unless there is some overhauling of the underlying templates. I think they are more informative to the reader linked by this template.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 04:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
No it isn't, because it takes you away from the articles, not to mention falling foul of the inclusion/transclusion rules. Read and digest the guidelines again. This is not what navboxes are intended for... -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 22:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
A navigation template is a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles. Editing of a navigation template is done in a central place, the template page.The emphasis is mine, but navboxes are not articles. As you can see, the guidelines pretty much already show that they are intended only to link articles, and the template space is used for editing, they just could do with being more explicit. -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 13:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Using such a long time, and if you want to remove, please get consensus.-- Qa003qa003 ( talk) 14:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
You've really got a talent for nitpicking. - Zanhe ( talk) 23:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
You blanked a bunch of templates that were under nomination at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_June_13#Template:GuldbaggeAwardBestFilm_footer under the presumption that a delete closure was inevitable. The debate was closed as no consensus. However, once you blanked them, they were deleted at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_June_20 in a routine closure. Now, Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Actress Award, Template:Cannes Film Festival Best Actor Award, Template:Golden Globe Award for Best Miniseries or Television Film and others seem inconseistent with the other templates.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you're name at the talk page for WP:Article titles and was wondering if you could comment at this discussion regarding a website's trademarked stylization. Dan56 ( talk) 22:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Do not redirect. The latter template is likely to be a huge template when I am done. It will serve a different purpose than the focussed one.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 04:16, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Regarding
Template:Andrzej Żuławski: I know (and support) that navboxes shouldn't show red links. That's why that template uses <noinclude>...</noinclude>
and an accompanying explanation. This method will not show red links in the template's transclusions, thus satisfying
WP:NAVBOX. It provides a convenient mechanism to 1) arrive at common names for future articles; 2) provide a complete list of the director's œuvre, thus satisfying
WP:REDYES; 3) simplify the correct chronological addition of articles when they get written. Hiding the missing titles in HTML comments achieves only #3. I suggest to restore the version with the complete list. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk)
11:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
For this - I couldn't find that template *d'oh* Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Through this way, I inform there is a discussion about partially disambiguated titles, known as " PDABs". This subguide of WP:D was approved at VPP, in a discussion you participated. Note there was a discussion of PDAB at WT:D the last weeks (everything is explained in the RFC). You are welcome to give ideas about the future of this guideline at WT:D. Tbhotch. ™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:35, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Please revisit THIS discussion. Thanks. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
You should probably do all the Emmy ones now while they are in season and people will be looking at the pages more closely.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ WP:FOUR/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:WAWARD) 11:24, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Fine, you don't think it should be in the intro. And fine, you feel so strongly about it that you're willing to click the undo button twice. Meanwhile, I'm trying to improve the information quality of Wikipedia.
If you can't stand that info being in the intro, move it out of the intro. Or open a discussion on the Talk page. Or leave a message on my Talk page saying what you think could be improved in my edit.
But please don't just click revert, revert. We need to grow the editing community. That sort of attitude doesn't drive me away (I'm not saying that's your intention). I've been here ten years and I've a thick skin. But others would find your behaviour antisocial and they might leave or be less enthusiastic about contributing to Wikipedia. Gronky ( talk) 12:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Those templates were already split off from a single template in 2009 after an extensive discussion to establish consensus and the current format (including an RFC at the WikiProject Video Games), which resulted in the current format. You're welcome to start up a new discussion and RFC at the project, but any sweeping changes like this are going to require a new consensus generated. -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 02:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey dude I don't freaking criticize your edits and say "its poorly worded". User:TreCoolGuy
Hi Robsinden! FYI - Batman vs. Superman was an article at the time I added the links to the navbox templates. It was changed to a redirect afterwards. Happy editing! GoingBatty ( talk) 15:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Images of box sets violate copyright now? Would it be any different if a picture of a box set was taken and uploaded on Wikipedia by a user? Would that classify as a free file? I honestly fail to see the issue here.-- DesignDeath ( talk) 11:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
With respects Rob, I have declined your speedy on Pocket Gangsters. While it is an WP:UGLY article, sources are available and any sense of advert is addressable. See its talk page. Best, Schmidt, Michael Q. 01:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Robsinden. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.
We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.
Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 22:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
I noticed that, in this diff, you deleted the section on Wikipedia coverage from the Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage article. I encourage you to discuss this issue further on the talk page page as some editors may disagree with its removal. Thank you. CaseyPenk ( talk) 20:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Aoidh ( talk) (formerly User:SudoGhost) 20:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
to help the admin see that these footer templates are no longer used, you can perform a 'null edit' on each article shown in 'what links here'. basically, you just open up the article, do nothing, then save the article, which will clear it from the list. I have been doing this for you on the ones that I see after seeing an admin reject your CSD since it did not look like the template was unused. but, I don't have time to do all of them. thank you. Frietjes ( talk) 15:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Two people doesn't make a consensus. There should have been a discussion with others before you started fucking around the templates.-- TheMovieBuff ( talk) 17:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
You're ridiculous.-- TheMovieBuff ( talk) 17:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
That redirect will just be there for a month - an argument was made its not a good redirect so I wanted to see how many ppl actually click on it daily.-- Obi-Wan Kenobi ( talk) 16:27, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see you removed the ref, I was suprised it hadnt happened previous! Its a ref for the authors talking about thier ideas, I added it as it shows they believe it to be an Irish sitcom, but the lead has been edit warred to bits lately, I am surprised it lasted this long. Shows that not many read the refs! Best leave it out for now anyhow. Murry1975 ( talk) 20:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
The vast majority of English-language sources call it Le Cercle Rouge. Film Fan 14:24, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Robsinden. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Les enfants terribles (film), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (France & French-related)#Works of art, cited at WP:NCCAPS. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 02:40, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Death Note question". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 17:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
To be fair to our readers, I think a temporary redirect to either J.K. Rowling or the article on the 2001 book " Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" by that author (and where this adaptation is already written about), is a valid consideration. The arguments about how the film topic might become supremely notable have a bit of merit, but I think it logical that we send readers for now to where it makes sense under policy, guideline and essay to keep readers informed. What'cha think? Schmidt, Michael Q. 02:20, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough we can leave the page as Hammersmith Apollo - it is a more recognisable name. But can we please put in the new corporate logo for the Apollo? As the old one you have restored to the page is no longer in use and I have been requested to remove it by both parties in ownership of the Eventim Apollo. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adfrench41 ( talk • contribs) 11:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
I was going to do the same thing once the AFD was closed, but you beat me to it . Schmidt, Michael Q. 17:41, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tuva Novotny, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Czech ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:52, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm very much hoping it won't come to this, but if the editor in question persists in their feeling that the section should be named Trivia and is doing it across multiple articles then an ANI case may be warranted. Hopefully we can talk them down on Soylent Green and it won't be an issue.
Could you have a look at Development of Jurassic World. I've seen you active in similar cases. I raised the issue of WP:NFF there, but the editors involved think it doesn't apply. 202.81.242.216 ( talk) 03:33, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
— Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 17:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey there Robsinden. It's totally fine to notify relevant WikiProjects about ongoing discussions, as with your recent interest in Template:Alfred Hitchcock, but be sure to word the notice neutrally, so as to avoid any semblance of canvassing (see "Campaigning" on that page). Ibadibam ( talk) 18:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, WP:Existing doesn't say anything about list entries. I think you're referring to "Avoid repeating links to the same article within a template", which is in a different section. However, I understand that List of Coronation Street characters performs the same function, and the template is just for articles, not sections within the same articles, and all the articles they linked to are included in the "lists of characters" part of the template. It's just that it's always been the way it was (not a good excuse) and people will wonder where certain characters currently appearing in the show are (and will probably try to re-insert them). Just letting you know that I now understand, but also my reasons for the original revert. There are other templates that do this. – anemone projectors– 16:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:The Rolling Stones albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Rob Sinden ( talk) 13:29, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
it would be great if you could fix the double redirects (e.g., the redirects to the templates you redirect). I just fixed these. Frietjes ( talk) 16:12, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
— Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 16:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
If you want to edit war, go ahead and keep reverting: everyone else is managing to discuss it like adults on the talk page. Perhaps you ought to try that out instead of edit warring? - SchroCat ( talk) 14:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Well done for your edit warring. Now grow up and join in the conversation and stop being such a WP:DICK. - SchroCat ( talk) 14:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of low-budget zombie films may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 12:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Robsiden, I'm Andy'sedits, in case my signature goes wrong. I'm sorry you thougth I disregarded your comment and instructions you left on my talk page. I saw your post about signatures, and I already had one from another person. I forgot to comment there about makign hte so that was why I removed yours without coming here to mention it. I haven't worked out the signature with the 'talk' & auto link,. I read in instructions to do the four ~ as the signature or use the pencil icon. I know htere is no excuse, but I can only think the reason was becuse I left a space between last . and putting the signature. I am a fan of Zombie films, and take the topic seriously, I would only make contribution comment knowing there is relaible propper source to back it up. would make sure I'd qualify if something is my personal opinion only. Hope you excuse the tardiness of my reply.--Andys'edtits 12:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andys'edtits ( talk • contribs) Signature problem now fixed after teahouse assitance. All in settings!-- Andys'edtits ( talk) 13:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
As has been already said, you need an RfC if you want to delete/merge all these Chinese surnames. Doing it piecemeal through AfD (a) isn't going to work because AFD is based on notability, including non-English sources, (b) is treading a fine line heading towards disruptive and WP:POINTY - I will only comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Li Surname (郦). Please intitate a RFC. In ictu oculi ( talk) 12:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I have just lost five minutes work and source because of an edit conflict caused by you hovering over the article adding a "who" ... do you not have other areas of the encyclopedia to disrupt? In ictu oculi ( talk) 13:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Rob,
I will give you the fix up later but you sent a message to User talk:95.90.118.201 who I have just spent four weeks deleting incorrect comments about Esperanto across articles, particularly Hungarian ones, and had (this is a redlink´ Grin Report) deleted after PROD and AfD with lots of personal abuse. I deliberately stayed away. My notably sourced article at Beethoven's liver meanwhile was on the history log as POINTy which it was but the point is here is how you can write a stub reliably sourced in two minutes if you know how, and odd how mine stands in its own right but this is how you have a reliably sourced, notable article and the only PUSHPOV is to push the point of N, RS, V. We might not like that but we come here or we don't which is why I stayed away cos I couldn't be bothered with him.
I presume you removed a reference to Esperanto which he is always pushing, occasionally under other IPs. He has met his match in me because I and my wife User:Monkap have both studied it at university many years ago and it is useful in the study of lingustics (she being native in finno ugric and me in English) but to pretend it is used in real life is a nonsense. He put in that it is an offical langage in Hungary, which is not true, it is taught on linguistics courses and in the narrowesst sense of the word it is official in that you get one mark on your course for having studied it for three months. I pointed out that English is not an official language in England.
I am just warning you cos he is not exactly a troll but a pushpov. In the AfD, it says so called english si trew you say pushpov. Well pushpov is not English it is Wikipedia jargon. argot in french. I only speak jargon in Hungarian but I don't know the word for it. Si Trew ( talk) 03:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
I would prefer the description "Irish presenter on british television" because she has never presented any programmes on any Irish stations. 80.111.172.25 ( talk) 17:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, you recently moved a page that was at AfD ([Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Clover - Film]); when the discussion was closed as delete, the closing administrator ended up not deleting the actual article but instead the pagemove redirect. While the move was correct, could you either 1) refrain from performing pagemoves while the article is at AfD or 2) put a clear note on the discussion page that you moved it? (See WP:NOMOVE, as well.) Cheers, Ansh 6 6 6 04:17, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Li (surname) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
The MOS supersedes personal opinions. Please read WP:DTT before trying to undo months of hard work to sloppy 90s standards, and show a little respect for WP:WAI. Separate tables are better for navigation, one lengthy table is ugly and less accessible, especially for that many rows. Your opinions in the edit summary are purely subjective, whereas the MOS is a tried and tested set of standards. The split tables format has been there for over a year, without disruption – no need for you to start now. Ma®©usBritish{ chat} 14:22, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Looking for something similar, I had a look at
Spencer Tracy filmography and
Christopher Lee filmography. Other than the rowspan (which I purposely avoided when merging these tables), I fail to see how anything like this can break a screen reader. The plain and simple approach reduces the page load time dramatically. --
Rob Sinden (
talk)
15:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I've told you once already, WP:Filmography does not take priority over WP:MOS, as WikiProjects custom MOS are only meant to
And, regarding the split of the table into year-by-year sections is against
MOS:TABLES also "
Splitting lists and tables per summary style is advised against". --
Rob Sinden (
talk)
16:29, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
|
I know about WP:FILMRATING, but many readers who are unfamiliar with the Die Hard series would want to know about the ratings of those films since the fourth one, Live Free or Die Hard, was PG-13 while the others are R. BattleshipMan ( talk) 19:05, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Wikimedes has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{ subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{ subst:Kittynap}}
I was going to give you and In ictu oculi kittens after your first exchange at the latest RfC and got sidetracked. In ictu oculi still looks like he needs one, so here’s one for you too. (How and why would one feed a virtual kitten 3 times a day?)-- Wikimedes ( talk) 05:17, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
This user has contributed to Man of Steel (film) good articles on Wikipedia. |
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your editorial contributions to Man of Steel (film), which recently was promoted to WP:GA.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
See WP:BRD and use the talk page: do not just revert. Your edit was poor and against the consensus on the article, which was why it was reverted initially. - SchroCat ( talk) 09:20, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
You are involved in an edit war. Stop. Go to the talk page and DISCUSS. On the way there, you may wish to stop by WP:BRD and brush up on things. - SchroCat ( talk) 11:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Category:Carry On films crew members, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Your deletions at Gina Torres, Nathan Fillion, Alan Tudyk, Morena Baccarin, Adam Baldwin, Jewel Staite, Sean Maher, Summer Glau, and Ron Glass have all been reverted by me and another editor, due to false edit summaries and false deletion reasons. Care to explain yourself here, so there's just one central discussion?
-- Lexein ( talk) 21:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Rob Sinden be careful, going to Nymf page asking them to come and help out in the discussion is getting very close to WP:CANVASS as well as WP:Meat puppetry Both of which could get you a ban — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarty72 ( talk • contribs) 22:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Nathan Fillion. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please arrive on one location for your discussion, refrain from any further reverting and get this matter resolved. Your slow edit warring is disrupting this article and all the other Firefly-related articles where it's taking place. -- Drmargi ( talk) 14:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I see your editcount odometer just clicked over to 20,000. Got a screenshot. -- Lexein ( talk) 17:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello RS. When your discussion about actors in navboxes came up I couldn't for, the life of me, remember where the past discussions were. Well, as happens around here, I stumbled across it today while looking for something else. So the 2nd item here Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers/Consensus summaries might be what you are looking for. Other discussion might have supplanted this one but I cannot remember that happening. Another flaw with the A&F wikiproject is that we tend to discuss things but the consensus doesn't always get written into the MoS. I hope this is of help and my apologies if it isn't. MarnetteD | Talk 02:07, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prehysteria!, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom Williams ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:13, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Can you explain why did you merge some of the film award templates to a single navbox?-- Earthh ( talk) 14:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I've just divided the template in three sections. I think it's fine now. Thank you for your patience.-- Earthh ( talk) 16:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Great find, raised this at COIN. That clearly confirms my suspicions that there was promotional editing going on at Ace Hotel and Dubtitle (as well as the others, of course). Ace Hotel's article could be a brochure for them. Dougweller ( talk) 13:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
You recently renamed Remember not, Lord, our offences to Remember Not, Lord, Our Offences. Sorry, but every catalogue of Purcell's works does not use such capitalisation, the source text does not, and in general, Anglican choral anthems do not follow this rule. Please review.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 16:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
The Chicago Manual of Style, which is what our MOS is largely based on, has this to say: -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 09:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't care who's right but both of you must stop move-warring. A full discussion at WP:RM is needed. It was unwise of you, ColonelHenry, to get the page moved back on the basis that it was uncontroversial - it clearly was. It was unwise of you, Robsinden, to move it back again instead of using the proper channels for discussing disputed moves. Bencherlite Talk 12:12, 20 December 2013 (UTC) |
Re: [8]
So it seems to you. Define dismay (a word that I don't know). The image of the baby was criticised by Bencherlite as not relevant to the article, I acted on that. The title page of the score which the composer dedicated to his own father seems more relevant. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:02, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
ps: Define "correct". A correct name cannot be found by consensus, it simply is correct. An article can have only one name. That name can be found by consensus. If there are different names for the topic, why not show them? I would like especially to see with due weight the name chosen by the creator of the music which happens to be the preference of the creators of the article, the style in more than 90% of the sources used for the article. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Robsinden, I was asked to comment about the reverting at A Boy Was Born and elsewhere. I'm not familiar with all the arguments, but the way forward is to discuss on talk, or start an RfC if no consensus can be found. Continuing to revert, especially when you're changing a style preference, is not a good idea. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Your opinion is requested at Talk:List of original programs distributed by Netflix#Massive reverts without explanation. -- Lexein ( talk) 21:43, 24 December 2013 (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 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |