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 2 |
Hi AbstractIllusions,
I would appreciate it if you direct your comments to the user who wanted the discussion to remain in user space. What I said really can be considered shaming the other user, so I fully agree with the other user, it should be in user space. Also I think you should reconsider your habit (?) of interfering with other user's disagreements and immediately taking someone's side, without being asked to do so.
Concerning your discussion wishes: For how long do you want it to remain open now? As I have said above and you probably read in the discussion you unarchived, the other user felt shamed that this was dragged out in the open. So, in the real world that would mean, you should set your discussion time wishes to as short a period as possible. Let's consider a different solution: The comment you were trying to save was about nesting. Would you settle for archiving the user disagreement discussion and have a new section that we title 'abolish nesting' so it clearly reflects what it is about?
Best wishes, Melody Lavender ( talk) 05:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
And could you please clean up after yourself and archive the vital articles talk page? You accidentally unarchived everything back to April. Thank you. -- Melody Lavender ( talk) 06:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Having been puzzled by many of the comments made, I investigated and found a User Talk page that I do not follow, had no link in the discussion, and did not look at before any of this posting. I see now the iceberg beneath the surface of my small comments. I have no interest in going back and forth on any of these issues now that I've seen the fuller discussion. Please bracket the entire comments above: I do not think there was consensus to close the discussion (such consensus should be discerned on the VA project talk page), I do not think the articles should be automatically added. Those are the only issues I have commented on and are my only stances on the issue. AbstractIllusions ( talk) 12:38, 6 July 2014 (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) 00:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind that I edited your post at the vital articles talk to include a link to the FAQ being discussed to shorten what people needed to do to go check the current wording. RJFJR ( talk) 14:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
There is a {{citation needed}} on the above article. Would like to see if you would be able to add a source for that sentence. Adamdaley ( talk) 05:27, 28 November 2014 (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 2 |
Hi AbstractIllusions,
I would appreciate it if you direct your comments to the user who wanted the discussion to remain in user space. What I said really can be considered shaming the other user, so I fully agree with the other user, it should be in user space. Also I think you should reconsider your habit (?) of interfering with other user's disagreements and immediately taking someone's side, without being asked to do so.
Concerning your discussion wishes: For how long do you want it to remain open now? As I have said above and you probably read in the discussion you unarchived, the other user felt shamed that this was dragged out in the open. So, in the real world that would mean, you should set your discussion time wishes to as short a period as possible. Let's consider a different solution: The comment you were trying to save was about nesting. Would you settle for archiving the user disagreement discussion and have a new section that we title 'abolish nesting' so it clearly reflects what it is about?
Best wishes, Melody Lavender ( talk) 05:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
And could you please clean up after yourself and archive the vital articles talk page? You accidentally unarchived everything back to April. Thank you. -- Melody Lavender ( talk) 06:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Having been puzzled by many of the comments made, I investigated and found a User Talk page that I do not follow, had no link in the discussion, and did not look at before any of this posting. I see now the iceberg beneath the surface of my small comments. I have no interest in going back and forth on any of these issues now that I've seen the fuller discussion. Please bracket the entire comments above: I do not think there was consensus to close the discussion (such consensus should be discerned on the VA project talk page), I do not think the articles should be automatically added. Those are the only issues I have commented on and are my only stances on the issue. AbstractIllusions ( talk) 12:38, 6 July 2014 (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) 00:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind that I edited your post at the vital articles talk to include a link to the FAQ being discussed to shorten what people needed to do to go check the current wording. RJFJR ( talk) 14:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
There is a {{citation needed}} on the above article. Would like to see if you would be able to add a source for that sentence. Adamdaley ( talk) 05:27, 28 November 2014 (UTC)