Jump to content

Talk:Electrico

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stop reverting the infobox!

[edit]

Hi, I don't mind if you guys engage in an edit war here. I have no horse in this race, except, please please stop re-introducing the about-to-be-deleted template {{infobox band}}. No matter what else you might think about the contents of the article, you won't like the results once that template is actually deleted. I've tried to add a copy in the versions used by both sides in this war, and even that hasn't seemed to help. Xtifr tälk 08:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I undid it once by accident - sorry about that. I'm not sure about the next step in resolving the dispute as it is an otherwise non-wikipedia editor involved and not discussing the article. violet/riga (t) 11:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resolving disputes

[edit]

Starting this as a new topic, since it's not directly related to the infobox issue.

I see there's been some user talk page discussion, and yes, I see it's one-sided so far. However, I'd also like to see some discussion here about the specific content that's under dispute. Even if that ends up being one-sided as well, it will help make it clear to third parties what the dispute is about. Beyond that, refer to Wikipedia:Resolving disputes, which suggests that the next step is to disengage for a while. Unless we're dealing with libel here, it won't hurt to have a POV article for a little while. Xtifr tälk 21:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really that kind of dispute. It's a user that is constantly reverting to a version of the article that includes numerous video links and goes against the MOS - it's not allowed and he needs to stop. He won't discuss it, and you can see from the user's contributions that there is never likely to be anything forthcoming. violet/riga (t) 21:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Going against the MOS is not something that needs to be resolved immediately (unlike, say, libel or WP:BLP violations). This looks like a perfectly normal dispute to me, and I see nothing that would justify going outside of the normal resolution procedures. The only other thing I'd say is that if he violates the WP:3RR rule, then you can probably get some admin intervention, but make sure you don't violate that rule yourself. Xtifr tälk 21:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know you're trying to help but I do know all about this stuff. Titles do not use camel case and blindly undoing that is not acceptable. violet/riga (t) 21:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's as may be, but many editors (including myself) consider edit wars a far greater evil than CamelCase titles and inappropriate video links. The more closely you follow the standard dispute resolution procedures, the more likely you are to get a sympathetic ear when you go to the next step after "disengage for a while". You may know all about the manual of style (as do I), but I also know something about dispute resolution, both as a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians and as an occasional volunteer at Wikipedia:Third opinion. And while I'm mostly sympathetic to your arguments, I'm not prepared to take sides as a third party at this point. Minlilin (talk · contribs) has managed to stop short of doing anything blockable so far, so standard dispute resolution guidelines policies still apply. Xtifr tälk 22:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Minlilin is ignoring discussion attempts and blindly reverting, violating the MOS and OWN. I'm tempted to protect the page myself but that would be inappropriate. violet/riga (t) 22:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Electrico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:01, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Electrico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:57, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Electrico&oldid=1241957433"