Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
Per [[WP:ANI]] I request to block him. ([[WP:CIVIL]]) --[[User:202.144.118.50|202.144.118.50]] 20:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC) |
Per [[WP:ANI]] I request to block him. ([[WP:CIVIL]]) --[[User:202.144.118.50|202.144.118.50]] 20:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
:Go for it - he deserves a short block after the way he's treated you. Let me know if you need backing up ;) [[User:TheIslander|<sub><font color="DarkGray">'''The'''</font></sub><font color="Blue">'''Islander'''</font>]] 20:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:25, 20 August 2007
Biting
My apologies, maybe i was a little quick in my revision summary this morning, but I still think it was a valid point. The information given by the anon editor originally is mostly factually correct (and i'm sure i can find references to match up with it) and i don't direct users to the WP:BITE page often or lightly. I think it's good wikiquette to always give a reason for reversion to the user if they are new or apparently new (this user having only contributed the same text to two articles qualifies them on that score) and the addition is not vandalism, which i think is a key tenet of assume good faith. Other than that it risks driving new editors away, which is not the idea, and the reason i believe the bite policy is in place.
I think tagging the section with either fact tags, or a references template was a more constructive way to deal with it. My apologies if i caused offence in this, but i felt the points that author made were valid, and worthy of inclusion, if in need of tidying a bit.
Thanks Owain.davies 20:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- Point taken on the copying, but i missed that here, as i think i changed it back on the other article first (which doesn't say that) and then duplicated here. Although, IMO, it doesn't look like it is directly copied, but paraphrased. And of course, copying is acceptable for direct quoting, which this could easily be turned in to.
- As for the comment on his page, accept it was badly worded, for which i apologise.
- I still think the section is worthy of inclusion, all be it with rewrite if necessary, and definitely with sourcing.
- Regards Owain.davies 06:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
This article is specific to self-service ticket-vending machines. It makes no mention of portable ticket machines that you may find carried on trains and ferries, the built-in under-desk ticket machines you may find in cinemas or tube stations (manned counter), the old Almex ticket machines that a bus driver might use, the small desk-top ticket machines that you might find at the entrance to Blenheim Palace etc etc, the list goes on. As I say, not all ticket machines are ticket-vending machines, so the title of the article should be what the article is about, i.e. ticket-vending machines. I wonder if you would mind reviewing your assessment of my logic. Regards, Mannafredo 14:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- OK, you make some very good points that I hadn't thought about. Having said that, why can't this article stay named 'ticket machine', with the view of including such machines in the future? As far as I'm aware, none of those you mention have articles, neither are they notable enough to have articles. They could, however, be mentioned in this article. TheIslander 15:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- I was in the process of doing just that, when I got some kind of wiki-error and lost the lot. When time permits, I'll have another go. Regards, Mannafredo 16:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch, hate it when that happens :-/. Best of luck ;) TheIslander 16:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Please block this user. As you can see from User talk:24.60.41.165, he has a long history of vandalism, including today with the article The Star Jones Show. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 17:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, seems there's not been enough recent activity from him to warrent a block. TheIslander 18:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Personal attacks
Yes, I lost my temper, and I should apologize. However, the Romanian-language comments directed at me and other users are of a disgusting nature - so much so that I do not want to translate all of them. Suffices to say that the comment just after yours on my talk page deems me a "stupid cunt". Dahn 20:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Block of User:Dahn
Per WP:ANI I request to block him. (WP:CIVIL) --202.144.118.50 20:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Go for it - he deserves a short block after the way he's treated you. Let me know if you need backing up ;) TheIslander 20:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)