![]() | 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 |
re your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Heineman - redirecting doesn't leave a log entry. I have noticed that some of my redirects have been reverted without any notification for me. At least if I prod something I can check my PROD log and see if the entries are still green (I use a script that colors redirects as such) or if they have been restored without discussion. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:54, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
I had informed him of ANI [1] but he ignored and still editing. Can you modify your message on ANI? Wareon ( talk) 11:35, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Literally ... thank you. Best turn of phrase I've read on Wikipedia for literally years. The Rambling Man ( Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:56, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Reyk,
Thanks for your comment. If I understand correctly, point 3 is a constructive suggestion directed at me. Could you spell out a bit more what you meant? The precursor activities to the ANI report were spread over a bunch of places and I'm not sure which bits triggered that response.
Thanks, JBL ( talk) 23:42, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Wait are you saying I am POV pushing here? Or defending me? I know we have been on opposite sides in the past, but I don't edit political article for this reason, however this is notable and I was surprised it was not added now that I did it has become a clusterfuck. Valoem talk contrib 04:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your edit to this article [3], and just wondered: I used "while" here with the meaning of "whereas", which I thought was an accepted meaning. Your version is better, but I'm just trying to learn whether I should avoid using "while" like this, or if it was correct but potentially confusing. Fram ( talk) 08:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
I think the issue here is TimothyBlue's casual dismissal and bad-faith assumptions in the actions of good-faith editors, false accusations of inflammatory behavior on my part, rampant filibustering and wikistalking (again, responding to literally every "keep" vote and every post about him with a giant text-wall), gross misrepresentation of policy (malls aren't events, so WP:ROUTINE holds no weight), constantly saying that things are "routine" and "run of the mill" with no evidence, and reckless mass AFDing to the point that he gets topics mixed up. It is clear that his views line up with literally no one else's, and are doing more harm than good. It is equally clear that no amount of discussion will get through to him (to the point that he's told me to stop posting on his talk page entirely), and so I think a topic ban from either shopping malls/retail, XFD, or both would not be a bad idea unless other admins have a better solution. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 07:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
re: [5] for [6]? TIA. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:54, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | |
Eight years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Minor Barnstar | |
I noticed how you found a missing period on Protonium and, after checking your contribs, you really do a great job with minor edits. Keep it up! BirdValiant ( talk) 22:18, 23 October 2020 (UTC) |
... he's just a troll. At least the likes of Mick MacNee and (pre-reformation) Alansohn had principles they followed, as opposed to AD being perfectly willing to lie, distort, insult and contradict himself in the service of knee-jerk inclusionism. Just sets my teeth on edge how he's so routinely and reflexively uncivil, and somehow never, ever gets sanctioned for it. Ravenswing 17:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm posting here is response to your post at WP:ANI#Disruptive POINTy AfD !votes and racist comparisons by Johnpacklambert, rather than take that discussion off-topic. I think we agree about WP:CRIN. Just because we could write a stub about a cricketer doesn't mean we have to. Another example is WP:NSPECIES - do we really need an article about an extinct animal known from a single tooth? or even about a species known from a single publication? In many cases, readers would be as well or better served by a redirect to a well-written list. Yrs, Narky Blert ( talk) 09:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
See Talk:Habib Miyan#Redirection. Am I missing something here? The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 16:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'm writing in regard to your recommendation for removal for the CalConnect page. The goal of my prior edit was to begin remaking the page to be more useful and less buzzwordy. Do you have any recommendations for doing this? Perhaps a piecemeal approach is less useful than a wholesale overhaul? (Apologies for the time lapse between then and now... pandemic.)
Thanks, Atlauren ( talk) 19:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing—
Polar mesospheric clouds—has been proposed for
merging with
Noctilucent cloud. If you are interested, please follow the (Discuss) link at the top of the article to participate in the merger discussion. Thank you.
Pierre cb (
talk)
05:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
If you get a chance, any interest in giving an opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derek Piotr (2nd nomination)? Given the somewhat confusing history here, I think it'd be best for this to have a definitive resolution, whatever it may be; I don't care what way you go, just want another look. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 22:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
A new discussion has begun regarding the AFL Player Significant Statistics Templates. Please add your thoughts there. DiamondIIIXX ( talk) 00:30, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Please join discussion here. Thank you. Coastside ( talk) 14:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi - Were you the editor who moved Honinbo into Four Go Houses? It seems that almost all useful contents was lost, and that Four Go Houses is incomplete now, and contains modern stuff unrelated to its title. I don't know where to find the original contents but other language WP still have some of the desired detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:3FF4:1:B62E:99FF:FE4C:71C3 ( talk) 16:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() | |
Nine years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:09, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Ok so a semi-apology for my comments at WT:WPM: I am certain that I could have found a more collegial way to express myself, and I should have invested the effort in doing that -- sorry. -- JBL ( talk) 13:03, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey, what do you think of this? I don't really wanna deal with the drahma, given the article's primary author and therefore the one who likely added the bad quote, so I self-reverted, but my edit should probably be restored in the long run. Honestly, I've been quietly (and selectively/inconsistently/casually) monitoring the whole rigmarole since I was pinged to ANI, and in order to avoid grave-dancing I've refrained from commenting, but if you-know-who is still adding fake content based on dubious sources in non-deletion-related contexts, said content probably needs to be fixed. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 01:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Confucius and other classical philosophers propounded the principle of the golden mean which counsels against extremism in general, which may or may not be true, but in this context it looks like "Confucius" is actually Jiao Hong. I can't find references to this problem in English outside of Wikiquote, but the original Chinese of the quote is attributed to Jiao Hong on multiple Chinese websites. CText attributes several works using the phrase to 项笃寿 and 陶珽, both Ming dynasty figures, but I haven't looked into it closely.
I self-reverted an ANI report earlier today because I noticed a certain crowd were still at ANI and I didn't want to risk them crowding in to suggest I be site-banned for my anti-Nazi views (or "making up lies about receiving emails" or "trying to out people by revealing their IPs and physical locations" or something like that) again. I then had half a mind to support the current TBAN proposal with the following:
... but I'm still really paranoid that any prose I post on ANI will result in swift reprisals, and I really don't need that. The current count seems to be something like 17-16 mildly in favour of TBANning, and with my support vote it'd be slightly more tilted toward passing, but it's still much too close for comfort. (I know it's not a "vote", but disagreeing with that many editors at ANI feels dangerous, and in my experience it's pretty rare for a closer to actually weigh the arguments when the vote-count is split roughly 50-50 and a policy/argument-based close would result in a backlash.) I also notice that you don't seem to have actually !voted, so... I guess your advice would be to hold my tongue?
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 06:02, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
++++++
The greater the difficulty, the more glory in surmounting it. Skillful pilots gain their reputation from storms and tempests
William Harris (talk) 08:21, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
Gymnastics qualifying is incredibly complicated, even under current rules. So, hopefully I explained it clear enough. Honestly, most of those articles don’t really seem to pass the notability test, but I’m not an expert. Afheather ( talk) 07:04, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
![]()
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. ( t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC) |
At ANI one editor has essentially said that I should be indefenitely blocked from editing Wikipedia because in the last 2 weeks when there was an ANI against Lugnuts for uncivility attacking me for nominating some of the 93,547 articles he created for deletion, I have nominated 2 of that huge number of articles for deletion. So this seems to me to say that A-an ANI that has not been closed, and where it seems highly unlikely to close, is still binding on people and so I must abide by it, or be driven forever from Wikipedia. This is very much frustrating me. You and a few other editos expicitly said I had done nothing wrong. I have not tried specifically to target Lugnuts. Most of the AfDs I have started during this time frame have actually involved other editors. This whole process makes no sense to me. Lugnuts falsely accuses me of targeting him. On what grounds does this, because someone found his language objectionable enough to bring to ANI, then become grounds to bar me from nominating any of the 93,547 articles he creted for deletion. Especailly if it applies to the during of the ANI, which has now run over 2 weeks. This is very frustrating. Even more frustrating is the claim that I should be indefinately blocked from editing Wikipedia period for doing this. So Lugnuts can be rude to me, and as a result I have to stop nominating any articles he created for AfD? Where is this even policy. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Hey, Reyk. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the
Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:40, 5 September 2022 (UTC) |
![]() |