→Merge discussion: new section |
|||
(15 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
One of the articles that you have been involved in editing, [[Token-object reading]], has been proposed for a merge with [[Psychometry]]. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by adding your comments on the [[Talk:Token-object_reading#Move page|discussion page]]. Thank you. - <font face="courier" color="#487946">[[User_talk:Steve3849|Steve3849]]</font> 11:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC) |
One of the articles that you have been involved in editing, [[Token-object reading]], has been proposed for a merge with [[Psychometry]]. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by adding your comments on the [[Talk:Token-object_reading#Move page|discussion page]]. Thank you. - <font face="courier" color="#487946">[[User_talk:Steve3849|Steve3849]]</font> 11:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
== [[Timeline of the burrito]] == |
|||
I'm afraid we have a bit of a problem. Just because the entries aren't explicit as to their importance, doesn't mean we remove them. In fact, it is just the opposite; you're supposed to look at the source and expand the entry. I've restored the entries you've removed because these deletions don't make any sense and I'm having trouble understanding why you removed them. Please continue the discussion on the talk page. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 07:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:Ok, I see how this isn't clear to the reader not familiar with the history. I'm in the process of filling in the blanks. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 08:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::Please don't use tags like {{tl|recentism}} in articles that don't require it. There is nothing "recent" in [[Timeline of the burrito]], and timeline articles are supposed to cover ''current'' events. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 19:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Continuing to delete items from a list without trying to merge them per the discussion on the talk page is not helpful. One of the items you recently deleted was discussed while the other was not. Further, the rationale you provided in the edit summary was somewhat strange, as the date of publication is used as a historical data point on Wikipedia, such as in discipline by year lists. Here, we are talking about the food history of the burrito. If you are willing to help research and write the history section of the burrito article, great, otherwise, these edits are not helpful. Please remember that there is no strict, black and white rule that we use when we determine the merit of inclusion, but rather a flexible, shades of gray approach that requires looking at the big picture. It may help to use the talk page to describe your own vision of the timeline article, using other lists as support. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 20:01, 20 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::See talk...keep discussion in one place.<span style="color:Purple">—</span> '''[[User:Fcsuper|<span style="color:#006699">f</span><span style="color:#6666FF">c</span><span style="color:#666699">s</span><span style="color:#336633">u</span><span style="color:#006699">p</span><span style="color:#6633FF">e</span><span style="color:#9966FF">r</span>]]'''<sup> ([[:User talk:Fcsuper|<span style="color:Olive">How's That?</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/Fcsuper|<span style="color:Teal">That's How!</span>]])</sup> <sub>([http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Exclusionism <span style="color:Maroon">Exclusionistic</span>] [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Immediatism <span style="color:Red">Immediatist</span>] ) </sub><span style="color:Purple">—</span> 21:58, 20 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::This isn't about the discussion. It's about your obsessive editing behavior which has ignored the discussion. Please familiarize yourself with [[WP:BRD]]. You don't keep reverting, you stop and have a discussion, and many of the points I've raised you continue to ignore. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 22:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::The only one obsessing is you over the WP voilations that you keep trying to introduce.<span style="color:Purple">—</span> '''[[User:Fcsuper|<span style="color:#006699">f</span><span style="color:#6666FF">c</span><span style="color:#666699">s</span><span style="color:#336633">u</span><span style="color:#006699">p</span><span style="color:#6633FF">e</span><span style="color:#9966FF">r</span>]]'''<sup> ([[:User talk:Fcsuper|<span style="color:Olive">How's That?</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/Fcsuper|<span style="color:Teal">That's How!</span>]])</sup> <sub>([http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Exclusionism <span style="color:Maroon">Exclusionistic</span>] [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Immediatism <span style="color:Red">Immediatist</span>] ) </sub><span style="color:Purple">—</span> 17:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Fcsuper, I have not introduced any violations. You don't seem to be familiar with how we use talk pages for discussion nor are you familiar with the collaborative aspect of Wikipedia and the [[WP:BRD]] model for editing. The talk page shows that you asked a question, received an answer, and then ignored the answer, continuing to ask the same questions over and over again. Your latest set of edits[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timeline_of_the_burrito&action=historysubmit&diff=398302081&oldid=397949764] are the very definition of tendentious, disruptive editing. Unless you are willing and able to do the research, discuss the merge proposal on the talk page, and help write articles, your continued behavior on this topic is not helping. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 23:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Update: I've removed your petty, disruptive tagging of the timeline article and I've begun slowly merging notable data points. The "multiple issues" template you added included many false allegations about the content, as did your edit summary. Please use the talk page to discuss issues in an open, honest, and clear manner. Falsely using template tags as "weapons" is not acceptable. In case you are not aware, we are here on Wikipedia to write articles and to collaborate in harmony with other editors. Please stop using Wikipedia as a battleground and lay down your sword. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 00:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:12, 23 November 2010
Welcome!
Hello, Fcsuper, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 00:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
minor barnstar
The Minor Barnstar | ||
for great editing - no question about it Dr Spam (MD) 13:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC) |
Links in the article Bible
Just want you to know, a long list of internal links has recently been deleted from the article Bible because they basically all served the same purpose and were therefore redundant. If you wish to insert an additional link, I suggest you make your case on Talk:Bible before adding the link. Thank you. --Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 19:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Bible
I am all for compromise, but changing Jewish to Judaism doesn't solve the problem you seem to be concerned with - at best it is semantics, at worst it actually is worse because something can be Jewish (books by IB Singer, for example) without being associated with a religion called "Judaism." which is why I reverted. Slrubenstein | Talk 16:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I agree with that, but you reverted everything, not just that one word (which I did do separately in case of an issue). Do you have other concerns? --Fcsuper (talk) 17:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
No. I don't know what went wrong, my intention was to rever only one edit of yours! Slrubenstein | Talk 17:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Tech Coast
There were some coding problems in the AfD discussion. I fixed it for you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 23:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! -- fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) 00:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Tags moving in "Jehovah's Witnesses" article
I'm just new here. I didn't see the previous tag was there. They do need to be in there, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandmelon (talk • contribs) 05:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: 3RR
I am currently trying to get discussion about edits made by Cmmmm, who has so far not co-operated in the proper process for resolving the dispute at the Controversy page. As regards Mandmelon, though I disagree with some of her arguments, I do agree with her approach.--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC) if you need help with your reports just leave me a blog.--Mindoshawn (talk) 17:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
November 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Talk:Purple, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Dicklyon (talk) 05:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Merge discussion
One of the articles that you have been involved in editing, Token-object reading, has been proposed for a merge with Psychometry. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. - Steve3849 11:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm afraid we have a bit of a problem. Just because the entries aren't explicit as to their importance, doesn't mean we remove them. In fact, it is just the opposite; you're supposed to look at the source and expand the entry. I've restored the entries you've removed because these deletions don't make any sense and I'm having trouble understanding why you removed them. Please continue the discussion on the talk page. Viriditas (talk) 07:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, I see how this isn't clear to the reader not familiar with the history. I'm in the process of filling in the blanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Please don't use tags like {{recentism}} in articles that don't require it. There is nothing "recent" in Timeline of the burrito, and timeline articles are supposed to cover current events. Viriditas (talk) 19:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Continuing to delete items from a list without trying to merge them per the discussion on the talk page is not helpful. One of the items you recently deleted was discussed while the other was not. Further, the rationale you provided in the edit summary was somewhat strange, as the date of publication is used as a historical data point on Wikipedia, such as in discipline by year lists. Here, we are talking about the food history of the burrito. If you are willing to help research and write the history section of the burrito article, great, otherwise, these edits are not helpful. Please remember that there is no strict, black and white rule that we use when we determine the merit of inclusion, but rather a flexible, shades of gray approach that requires looking at the big picture. It may help to use the talk page to describe your own vision of the timeline article, using other lists as support. Viriditas (talk) 20:01, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- See talk...keep discussion in one place.— fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 21:58, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- This isn't about the discussion. It's about your obsessive editing behavior which has ignored the discussion. Please familiarize yourself with WP:BRD. You don't keep reverting, you stop and have a discussion, and many of the points I've raised you continue to ignore. Viriditas (talk) 22:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- The only one obsessing is you over the WP voilations that you keep trying to introduce.— fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 17:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- Fcsuper, I have not introduced any violations. You don't seem to be familiar with how we use talk pages for discussion nor are you familiar with the collaborative aspect of Wikipedia and the WP:BRD model for editing. The talk page shows that you asked a question, received an answer, and then ignored the answer, continuing to ask the same questions over and over again. Your latest set of edits[1] are the very definition of tendentious, disruptive editing. Unless you are willing and able to do the research, discuss the merge proposal on the talk page, and help write articles, your continued behavior on this topic is not helping. Viriditas (talk) 23:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- The only one obsessing is you over the WP voilations that you keep trying to introduce.— fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 17:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- This isn't about the discussion. It's about your obsessive editing behavior which has ignored the discussion. Please familiarize yourself with WP:BRD. You don't keep reverting, you stop and have a discussion, and many of the points I've raised you continue to ignore. Viriditas (talk) 22:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- See talk...keep discussion in one place.— fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 21:58, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Update: I've removed your petty, disruptive tagging of the timeline article and I've begun slowly merging notable data points. The "multiple issues" template you added included many false allegations about the content, as did your edit summary. Please use the talk page to discuss issues in an open, honest, and clear manner. Falsely using template tags as "weapons" is not acceptable. In case you are not aware, we are here on Wikipedia to write articles and to collaborate in harmony with other editors. Please stop using Wikipedia as a battleground and lay down your sword. Viriditas (talk) 00:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)