Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk | contribs) |
→Who on earth is Versus?: cookies? |
||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
:::I've opened a section on talk, because we should let others 'wade in', I'm afraid I don't understand the purpose of your edits beyond trying to include 'the wounded man', why not mention the catering staff or the train driver in that list or … several others who are mentioned by name but who are clearly uninvolved with the central incident. So far honoured/ not yet honoured makes some sense, until the matter is settled.[[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 21:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC) |
:::I've opened a section on talk, because we should let others 'wade in', I'm afraid I don't understand the purpose of your edits beyond trying to include 'the wounded man', why not mention the catering staff or the train driver in that list or … several others who are mentioned by name but who are clearly uninvolved with the central incident. So far honoured/ not yet honoured makes some sense, until the matter is settled.[[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 21:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
::::Sandra, the DRN has been closed, you can't re-open it by adding my name and you are supposed to formally notify me ''(I don't care about that, but the DRN does)''. There is a discussion on talk, why not present your arguments there? If you don't, the DRN will take a very dim view of your behaviour and think you are wasting its time.[[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 22:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC) |
::::Sandra, the DRN has been closed, you can't re-open it by adding my name and you are supposed to formally notify me ''(I don't care about that, but the DRN does)''. There is a discussion on talk, why not present your arguments there? If you don't, the DRN will take a very dim view of your behaviour and think you are wasting its time.[[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 22:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
===Cookies? === |
|||
Sandra, I'm sorry, but it isn't me who is accusing you of 'slander', it isn't me who is claiming consensus where none exists, it isn't me who leaves messages on other newbie editor's talk pages, about you, which are at least ill-advised, if not false. It isn't me who unilaterally decides to completely rewrite an article, knowing that the rewrite is almost certainly controversial, without thinking it ''just might'' be an idea to consult others who have worked on it. We aren't in a school playground where we can just 'kiss and make up', cookies are no substitute for competence and willingness to work with others and learn. Why don't you read what GC ''(who you say agrees with your edits)'', has put on the ANI. At the moment you are just wasting a lot of people's time, for reasons of your own. You're an adult, that's your choice. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 23:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== August 2015 == |
== August 2015 == |
Revision as of 23:42, 14 September 2015
Welcome
|
BAD
Sandra opposed to terrorism, you are invited to the Teahouse!
Hi Sandra opposed to terrorism! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2015 (UTC) |
Disambiguation link notification for August 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whom Gods Destroy (Star Trek: The Original Series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Caeser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
2015 attack in Thalys train car has been nominated for Did You Know
- Re: Anglade in the 2015 Thalys train attack article. I am not currently working at WP:Dispute resolution, but I am happy to share with you my perspective on the problem. First and foremost it is very difficult for many editors to understand that the Wikipedia is not about "correctness", but instead it is about information that is verifiable in reliable sources. (In this case, just drop the word "correctness" and stick to sources.) Articles are not about miscellaneous information. See WP:What Wikipedia is not. Articles are intended to present and preserve information about things that are important. WP:Notability has become the measure of that importance. Articles must be balanced. This means that not only should they be written from a neutral point of view but they should not give undue weight to any particular facet of a topic. One way to help achieve balance when creating or editing articles on Wikipedia is to focus on why the topic, in this case the event, is important. Where does this event fit in the historical continuum? What is it about this event that makes it special or remarkable? When I do that for this event I find that the names of witnesses or the injured are not important. Even the names of the passengers who did the take-down don't rate highly in importance. Certainly other non-related information about someone who happened to be there and happened to talk to the press would not really be appropriate for this article. See WP:INDISCRIMINATE. You might read the very brief essay at WP:Balance Your Perspectives written in 2008 by a former editor. --Bejnar (talk) 20:16, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Who on earth is Versus?
Sandra, before you make aspersions against other editors, in edit reasons and on admin talk pages, you should be pretty sure of what you are saying. I don't even know who 'Versus' is and an admin check will reveal that I have never interacted with 'V'. Unfounded accusations won't add to your credibility.Pincrete (talk) 20:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
- You made an accusation that I was the only editor supporting one kind of edit but this is not true. However, I am sorry to have linked you to Versus. Versus is a banned editor who was edit warring in the train article about the very same thing you are arguing for. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 20:29, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've opened a section on talk, because we should let others 'wade in', I'm afraid I don't understand the purpose of your edits beyond trying to include 'the wounded man', why not mention the catering staff or the train driver in that list or … several others who are mentioned by name but who are clearly uninvolved with the central incident. So far honoured/ not yet honoured makes some sense, until the matter is settled.Pincrete (talk) 21:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
- Sandra, the DRN has been closed, you can't re-open it by adding my name and you are supposed to formally notify me (I don't care about that, but the DRN does). There is a discussion on talk, why not present your arguments there? If you don't, the DRN will take a very dim view of your behaviour and think you are wasting its time.Pincrete (talk) 22:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've opened a section on talk, because we should let others 'wade in', I'm afraid I don't understand the purpose of your edits beyond trying to include 'the wounded man', why not mention the catering staff or the train driver in that list or … several others who are mentioned by name but who are clearly uninvolved with the central incident. So far honoured/ not yet honoured makes some sense, until the matter is settled.Pincrete (talk) 21:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Cookies?
Sandra, I'm sorry, but it isn't me who is accusing you of 'slander', it isn't me who is claiming consensus where none exists, it isn't me who leaves messages on other newbie editor's talk pages, about you, which are at least ill-advised, if not false. It isn't me who unilaterally decides to completely rewrite an article, knowing that the rewrite is almost certainly controversial, without thinking it just might be an idea to consult others who have worked on it. We aren't in a school playground where we can just 'kiss and make up', cookies are no substitute for competence and willingness to work with others and learn. Why don't you read what GC (who you say agrees with your edits), has put on the ANI. At the moment you are just wasting a lot of people's time, for reasons of your own. You're an adult, that's your choice. Pincrete (talk) 23:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
August 2015
Your case at dispute resolution has been filed, but has had a general close because you did not list other users/parties that were involved in the dispute, feel free to relist the case when you have listed and notified all parties involved, thank you. RMS52 Talk to me 20:58, 30 August 2015 (UTC) ok, but user friendly behaviour would be to keep it open
Disputed tag
Please read the instructions for how to use {{disputed}}. As it is, when you click on "See the relevant discussion on the talk page." it goes nowhere. I can't tell looking at the talk page where a dispute is taking place as there are many disputes taking place. -- GreenC 21:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
DRN closure
DRN is not a forum for making judgments about disputes, it is only for the purpose of attempting to help editors involved in disputes come to consensus. When a primary participant in a dispute is unwilling to participate, then there is no possibility that consensus can be reached and the case is closed. In this case Pincrete has chosen not to participate, choosing instead to continue discussion at the article talk page, and discussion between other editors at DRN is futile. The same is true at all other moderated content dispute resolution forums at English Wikipedia such as Third Opinion and Formal Mediation: see for example prerequisites to mediation #5 and #6. The only avenue by which a disputant can ask for help where the others in the dispute must either participate or have their positions ignored is a request for comments. If you choose to file a RFC be sure to read all the instructions on that page first and note that most RFC's run for 30 days. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC) (current DRN Coordinator)
Noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Editing
Hi there. Thanks for updating the Great Ocean Road article. I noticed you only used a bare url as a reference and instead of naming it, you used the same one three times. Considering the number of edits you have made I think it is time you learned to reference correctly. Bare urls are insufficient because addresses change. Please give references a name so they can be used multiple times. This would be how it is done. Also your summary of "leak problems" was a poor summary. It gave me no indication of what your contribution actually was. I hope you can make an effort to consider my small requests, should you continue to edit here. - Shiftchange (talk) 21:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for your instructions. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 14:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)