User talk:RandomXYZb/Archive 7
 |
|---|
| 18 November 2024 |
|
Archive 1 (29 May 2007) |
Uploading
[edit]Hey Giles, I'd just like to know if it is Against the wikipedia rules to upload a photograph and put it on your userpage (I took the photo, so I have full responsibility for it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammbic (talk • contribs)
Hi Giles,
I hope my last message on your talk page did not sound rude. I respect your views on this subject and I'm glad you're interested in making sure disambiguation pages are structured consistantly across the board. The guideline I was referring to on WP:MOSDAB was the Linking to a primary topic section. The example given there is as follows:
A school is an institution for learning.
School may also refer to:
- School (discipline), a group of people with common characteristics in what they do, e.g. a school of painting, or a school of thought
- "School" (song), by the grunge music group Nirvana
- School (band), a band from Konami's Pop'n Music series
- A swarm of fish
As you can see, the first line explains the main entry; the one that you would get if you typed the name of the article into the search bar. As you have correctly pointed out, the "John Smith" example on WP:MOSDAB does not start out with a "main entry" line. I do not believe that this is because it is a human name disambiguation page, but rather that there is no "main entry" that corresponds to that specific disambiguation page. Please let me know your thoughts on this subject, as a large portion of my contribution to Wikipedia is the creation and reformatting of disambiguation pages, and I want to be in snyc with established guidelines.
Neelix 13:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Giles,
- In response to your suggestion, I think submitting this issue to the help desk is a great idea. That might lead to more specific guidelines on WP:MOSDAB, which is something I am highly in favour of. I've never submitted a question to the help desk before, though. Have you?
- Hi Giles,
- Agreed. It's good to be directly collaboriating with a fellow Wikipedian!
- Hi Giles,
- I am pleased with how our question is structured as of my 19:24, 10 November 2007 edit on your sandbox, and I gather from your note on my talk page that you are as well. Feel free to pose the question to the help desk.
- Hi Giles,
- In general, I list human name disambiguation page entries alphabetically. This is currently the norm on Wikipedia. Sorting by significance is too highly arbitrary. Dividing longer lists into categories (as is performed on general disambiguation pages) might be a good suggestion, but it is not the current general practice.
- Hi Giles,
- In what case are you thinking that alphabetically would not work? The people may have the same names, but the titles of their articles have to be different.
- Hi Giles,
- Be sure to let me know if you ever do!
Please refrain from making personal attacks
[edit]For you to threaten me with a vandalism warning for doing nothing but attempting (and in my view, but apparently not yours) to make Jimbo's page look better is absolutely ridiculous, especially as I had indicated exactly what I was doing in the edit summary. Please redact your unfounded accusations and promise to do better next time. 129.170.203.217 21:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, that is the edit I am talking about. Thank you for your very nice response (and I apologize for the new IP). 129.170.203.217 21:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Trust me, I understand the guidelines about editing others' pages. However, in my experience, the community's interpretation of this rule has been that users should not make significant changes to the pages of other wikipedians without their consent, but that minor fixes, especially aesthetic formatting, are generally okay. I'd say it's especially okay considering Jimbo has an invitation asking people to edit his page for him towards the bottom. In any case, the edit summary I gave clearly showed that mine was a good-faith attempt to make Jimbo's page look better. I understand that IPs editing that page can generally not be trusted, but if you had looked at my edits in detail there's no way you could have, within reason, come to the conclusion that they were any kind of vandalism as defined by policy. I think if contributors here gave a little more respect to IP editors, it would go a long way toward improving the reputation of this ambitious project. 129.170.203.217 22:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, and right after that note about respecting the formatting, he wrote "Actually, scratch that. Since this page is just so simple and plain, my ultimate dream is that some person who thinks it is fun would come along and make it look perfect, or close to perfect." Honestly, I fail to see how eliminating blank space is anything other than making a good-faith contribution to the formatting of the page. If you had simply reverted it as out of place, or as not aesthetically pleasing that would be one thing, but given Jimbo's express invitation for others to try to improve his page I feel somewhat betrayed by your actions. I have done nothing but follow directions and have been scolded for doing so with no less than boilerplate text.
- I have reasons for not registering an account. You may not understand them, but that does not mean they do not exist. 129.170.203.122 00:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism
[edit]Hey Giles, I KEEP GETTING MY PAGE VANDALISED! It's really annoying and has some bad language included. And whats worse, Wikipedia blames me on my talk page for doing it (saying I did it without logging in).I try to clean once every 24 hours but someone is still doing it! Is there some way you can block it from editing by non logged in users or track the IP? --Sammbic 22:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Dermacia Inc
[edit]While exploring Category:Articles actively undergoing construction I came across Dermacia Inc and noticed that you had tagged it with CSD A7, then when the creator requested {{hangon}} you changed it to {{underconstruction}}. I'm curious what is the right protocol in a case like this. I don't think there is any chance that this article will turn out to be acceptable under WP:N. I could add a note at the article's talk page; reinsert the CSD tag, or ...? Since you have already been there, I thought I'd ask you. If I had been the first outside "reviewer" there, I'd ask at WP:EAR. Sbowers3 16:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'll leave a note on the article's talk page and on the creator's talk page to explain the notability policy and strongly suggesting that there is very little chance the article will be acceptable. I'll also suggest moving it to the user's sandbox if he really wants to spend more time on it. Sbowers3 16:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]For the heads up on how I goofed on that guys page. I've read a few pages and figured out how to post on the talk pages, sign my posts etc. --Revotfel 23:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
The Chat
[edit]Hey Giles, Even though the group that publshes The Chat calls themselves a club, the publication is an important regional ornithology journal. I'm new at this should i include the justification for thre article on the discussion page? Thanks for your interest. Picbor 18:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Inappropriate?
[edit]Yes, I'm a noob when it comes to editing, and I apologize for the confusion, but how is the subject inappropriate? I've seen porn, all sorts of garbage in these pages, I'm really at a loss here.. MickCrichton 21:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Now the discussion's been deleted, what is the problem here? This is confusing as heck MickCrichton 21:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Smile
[edit]
SJP has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.