m →objection: fix |
→objection: reply |
||
Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
:The talk page is the correct place for the comments. I guarantee you nobody is looking at archive8. The talk page is far more visible. FAR pages are for the FAR process and not general discussion. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 19:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
:The talk page is the correct place for the comments. I guarantee you nobody is looking at archive8. The talk page is far more visible. FAR pages are for the FAR process and not general discussion. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 19:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
::You may begin a discussion about the foreign policy section but I am not ready for a huge fight. So please don't paste my comments. If you think the comments are good, you can say them in your own words (or even, since there is GFDL) copy some of my proposed wording. Or you can say there were was a discussion in archive 8 and that you think that it is useful to discuss the following points. |
::You may begin a discussion about the foreign policy section but I am not ready for a huge fight. So please don't paste my comments. If you think the comments are good, you can say them in your own words (or even, since there is GFDL) copy some of my proposed wording. Or you can say there were was a discussion in archive 8 and that you think that it is useful to discuss the following points. |
||
::Are you wanting to be administrator? If so, show the calm and reasonable side of you. This is your chance to shine. [[User:Judith Merrick|Judith Merrick]] ([[User talk:Judith Merrick|talk]]) 19:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
::Are you wanting to be administrator? If so, show the calm and reasonable side of you. This is your chance to shine. [[User:Judith Merrick|Judith Merrick]] ([[User talk:Judith Merrick|talk]]) 19:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
:::Judith, the last thing I want right now is a fight, and I will respect your request not to paste your post on the talk page. I have not even read your comments yet, but they look constructive, so I am not sure why you want them hidden in some FAR page that nobody can see. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 19:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
:::Judith, the last thing I want right now is a fight, and I will respect your request not to paste your post on the talk page. I have not even read your comments yet, but they look constructive, so I am not sure why you want them hidden in some FAR page that nobody can see. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 19:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
::::This is the reason that Wikipedia is so bad. Read my archive 8 suggestions. They are all in good faith. They are not anti-Obama or pro-Obama, just the neutral facts and a pretty good summary for foreign policy. Yet, the response to that is some pretty nasty stuff, accusations of sockpuppetry, threats to block, flimsy logic used to accuse. Calling it disruption is just accusatory. The correct thing to do could have been to point out that the FAR is closed but that there is a time delay between closure and when the blue box is out there to close it. See, that's calm and productive rather than rudeness and accusations. |
::::This is the reason that Wikipedia is so bad. Read my archive 8 suggestions. They are all in good faith. They are not anti-Obama or pro-Obama, just the neutral facts and a pretty good summary for foreign policy. Yet, the response to that is some pretty nasty stuff, accusations of sockpuppetry, threats to block, flimsy logic used to accuse. Calling it disruption is just accusatory. The correct thing to do could have been to point out that the FAR is closed but that there is a time delay between closure and when the blue box is out there to close it. See, that's calm and productive rather than rudeness and accusations. |
||
::::You can see that I am calm and try to AVOID disruption. I know that the article talk page is a battleground so I try not to inject ideas there. If you think I am bad, then read archive 8 and tell me what suggestion is disruptive and radical. [[User:Judith Merrick|Judith Merrick]] ([[User talk:Judith Merrick|talk]]) 20:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
::::You can see that I am calm and try to AVOID disruption. I know that the article talk page is a battleground so I try not to inject ideas there. If you think I am bad, then read archive 8 and tell me what suggestion is disruptive and radical. [[User:Judith Merrick|Judith Merrick]] ([[User talk:Judith Merrick|talk]]) 20:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
⚫ | :::::I understand your confusion, which is why I created [[Template:FARClosed]], so that this situation does not arise in the future. As for everything else, I am not involved in the sockpuppetry case, nor am I particularly interested in that mess. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 20:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
:::::In addition, I never said you or were comments were bad. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 20:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | ::::I understand your confusion, which is why I created [[Template:FARClosed]], so that this situation does not arise in the future. As for everything else, I am not involved in the sockpuppetry case, nor am I particularly interested in that mess. [[User:Dabomb87|Dabomb87]] ([[User talk:Dabomb87#top|talk]]) 20:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
== RFA == |
== RFA == |
Revision as of 20:17, 17 March 2010
Template:Multicol
July 2007 – August 2008 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Brady Bunch episodes
Support added. Jimknut (talk) 23:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Re: Venues
I will try to get to that soon. Would you be willing to do me a favour by adding alt text to this page: Lisa Simpson. I really am no good at it. I took a stab at the lead image, so you could use that: "A yellow skinned cartoon character wearing a red dress. She is smiling." Thanks, Scorpion0422 00:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- No problem, and will work on Lisa ASAP. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- see barnstar page 01:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I just finished the last of his comments. Please let me know if you need me to do anything else. --Kumioko (talk) 02:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Linking question
I noticed that you unlinked South & Central America and the Caribbean in the Aiphanes article. I was wondering if your rationale for doing so - this isn't meant as a complaint, just to try to avoid the problem in the future. Guettarda (talk) 05:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Most, if not all, readers know where South America and Central America are, and perhaps to a lesser extent the Carribean. Nothing in those articles is likely to aid their understanding of the topic; indeed, WP:OVERLINK says not to link common geographical terms (such as continents). I guess you could make a case for linking Carribean but I don't think it's that useful. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing those bits! Faults like that are easy to miss in an article of that size, quite helpful. Please stop by the full-on FAC if you get a chance! Staxringold talkcontribs 20:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Link
Regarding this edit [1] I prefer to leave that link in the article because the article Conditionality specifically deals with international development, explaining the context in which it is being used in the article. --maclean (talk) 04:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I undid my edit. Congrats on the TFA: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 19, 2010. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Dabomb87, I've had a look in my chart books and unfortunately none of Taylor Swift's releases are in them as she only charted in the UK in 2009 and the books only go up to the end of 2007 (singles) and 2008 (albums). --JD554 (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
objection
Some people object to comments being moved. Some comments were moved to the Obama talk page section a few weeks ago and there were objections.
If possible, do not move my comments (remove them). If you wish, you may say that there were comments listed in archive 8. However, I do not want to look like I added comments on the talk page to start a fight. Judith Merrick (talk) 19:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- The talk page is the correct place for the comments. I guarantee you nobody is looking at archive8. The talk page is far more visible. FAR pages are for the FAR process and not general discussion. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- You may begin a discussion about the foreign policy section but I am not ready for a huge fight. So please don't paste my comments. If you think the comments are good, you can say them in your own words (or even, since there is GFDL) copy some of my proposed wording. Or you can say there were was a discussion in archive 8 and that you think that it is useful to discuss the following points.
- Are you wanting to be administrator? If so, show the calm and reasonable side of you. This is your chance to shine. Judith Merrick (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Judith, the last thing I want right now is a fight, and I will respect your request not to paste your post on the talk page. I have not even read your comments yet, but they look constructive, so I am not sure why you want them hidden in some FAR page that nobody can see. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- This is the reason that Wikipedia is so bad. Read my archive 8 suggestions. They are all in good faith. They are not anti-Obama or pro-Obama, just the neutral facts and a pretty good summary for foreign policy. Yet, the response to that is some pretty nasty stuff, accusations of sockpuppetry, threats to block, flimsy logic used to accuse. Calling it disruption is just accusatory. The correct thing to do could have been to point out that the FAR is closed but that there is a time delay between closure and when the blue box is out there to close it. See, that's calm and productive rather than rudeness and accusations.
- You can see that I am calm and try to AVOID disruption. I know that the article talk page is a battleground so I try not to inject ideas there. If you think I am bad, then read archive 8 and tell me what suggestion is disruptive and radical. Judith Merrick (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- I understand your confusion, which is why I created Template:FARClosed, so that this situation does not arise in the future. As for everything else, I am not involved in the sockpuppetry case, nor am I particularly interested in that mess. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- In addition, I never said you or were comments were bad. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Judith, the last thing I want right now is a fight, and I will respect your request not to paste your post on the talk page. I have not even read your comments yet, but they look constructive, so I am not sure why you want them hidden in some FAR page that nobody can see. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
RFA
DaBomb87, it's time. Dealing with disruption day in and day out wears down the most patient. What are you waiting for? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Give me some time to reply while I sort out everything that's happened in the past half hour. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Sort it tomorrow, maybe by then the CUs will get off their arses and stop leaving unnecessary disruption to productive editors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)