Hello, HappyMcSlappy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Paleo Neonate – 16:24, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi HappyMcSlappy, is your username (and your signature text "slap me") a reference to Happy slapping? ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 17:52, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- No. It's a silly play on words.
Happy (
Slap me) 18:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. If you're uncomfortable with the rather unfunny connotation, you may like to request a username change at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 18:07, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Its not nonsense rational. A tag notability tag is added. That means someone is questioning the notability of the article. It is taken to AFD so that's the discussion. No consensus defaults to keep. Therefor there is no consensus that the article is not notable and so it should no longer be tagged. Imagine another tag is added (for example {{ POV}} or any other neutrality template) and there is a discussion with no consensus reached. The tag would be removed in this case. You might disagree, but it is very clearly not nonsense. Aircorn (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- First off, you're just making up the justification for removing the tags. There is no policy, or even a precedent for that. You're also presenting your argument about the tags as if it's settled fact, when it's very clearly not. It's not a fact at all, just an argument.
- Do you want the tags gone? So do I. So go discuss it on the talk page, where we can figure out a way to address the issues that they're calling out, instead of pretending that there's some procedural reason why we can't have them. Even if there was such a procedural reason enshrined in policy somewhere, it wouldn't matter, because the issues remain and the five pillars (including WP:IAR) trump policies. Happy ( Slap me) 17:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- P.S. The following paragraph is not a threat in any way, but a fact for you to consider.
- An editor was just indefinitely page-blocked from that page yesterday for removing those tags while three or more other editors were trying to get them to discuss it at talk.
- Coming along and reinstating one of the reverts that just got a disruptive editor blocked from the page isn't helpful, especially when you haven't posted to the talk page at all about it. If you have an argument as to why there's no notability issues with the article and the editors who feel there is are wrong, I'm all ears. Really. The same is true if you have some additional sources or something else that might help establish his notability more clearly.
- I'm not interested in arguments about procedural matters at all, but I'm really quite happy to discuss the issue of his actual notability, from whatever angle you'd like. Happy ( Slap me) 18:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Daniel Case (
talk) 19:12, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Hello, HappyMcSlappy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Paleo Neonate – 16:24, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi HappyMcSlappy, is your username (and your signature text "slap me") a reference to Happy slapping? ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 17:52, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- No. It's a silly play on words.
Happy (
Slap me) 18:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. If you're uncomfortable with the rather unfunny connotation, you may like to request a username change at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 18:07, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Its not nonsense rational. A tag notability tag is added. That means someone is questioning the notability of the article. It is taken to AFD so that's the discussion. No consensus defaults to keep. Therefor there is no consensus that the article is not notable and so it should no longer be tagged. Imagine another tag is added (for example {{ POV}} or any other neutrality template) and there is a discussion with no consensus reached. The tag would be removed in this case. You might disagree, but it is very clearly not nonsense. Aircorn (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- First off, you're just making up the justification for removing the tags. There is no policy, or even a precedent for that. You're also presenting your argument about the tags as if it's settled fact, when it's very clearly not. It's not a fact at all, just an argument.
- Do you want the tags gone? So do I. So go discuss it on the talk page, where we can figure out a way to address the issues that they're calling out, instead of pretending that there's some procedural reason why we can't have them. Even if there was such a procedural reason enshrined in policy somewhere, it wouldn't matter, because the issues remain and the five pillars (including WP:IAR) trump policies. Happy ( Slap me) 17:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- P.S. The following paragraph is not a threat in any way, but a fact for you to consider.
- An editor was just indefinitely page-blocked from that page yesterday for removing those tags while three or more other editors were trying to get them to discuss it at talk.
- Coming along and reinstating one of the reverts that just got a disruptive editor blocked from the page isn't helpful, especially when you haven't posted to the talk page at all about it. If you have an argument as to why there's no notability issues with the article and the editors who feel there is are wrong, I'm all ears. Really. The same is true if you have some additional sources or something else that might help establish his notability more clearly.
- I'm not interested in arguments about procedural matters at all, but I'm really quite happy to discuss the issue of his actual notability, from whatever angle you'd like. Happy ( Slap me) 18:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Daniel Case (
talk) 19:12, 21 September 2022 (UTC)