→RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes: new section |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
There is an RfC at [[Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes]] concerning what What should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 21:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC) |
There is an RfC at [[Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes]] concerning what What should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 21:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC) |
||
== Personalizing and attributing motive == |
|||
TFD, you have written several things, and are behaving in a way, that violates AGF. Things like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:N0n3up&diff=prev&oldid=699926781 this] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABernie_Sanders&type=revision&diff=700687855&oldid=700685421 this] are completely out of line and are getting in the way of dealing with content in the Sanders article. Please stop doing that and deal with the actual content proposals. I don't even know what you mean about "discrediting Sanders". Thanks. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 17:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:57, 20 January 2016
2008: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Monarchy of Canada
I think I may depart the Rfc. Mies' attitude there, is becoming unbearable. GoodDay (talk) 22:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
BTW: The Canada Act 1982 question. Just ignore it, I was a tad confused when I asked it & meant to pose the question to Mies & Qex. GoodDay (talk) 03:20, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
FWIW - In the third paragraph of your RSN post, you wrote 'representative', instead of 'residences'. GoodDay (talk) 02:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
You should have received a notification through the Notifications extension, but anyway, here's a formal notification that I mentioned you in a topic started on the administrators' incident noticeboard. I am looking forward to your reply there; thanks! odder (talk) 23:55, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Thomas Jefferson
Thanks for your helpful addition to the TJ talk page. I think it would be even more helpful if you commented at Gwillhickers' "West Point in the lede" section, registering yourself as "Against." I would like to still keep your comment where you put it, adding a link to WP:BALASPS and quoting it. I could do that or you could. Best wishes, YoPienso (talk) 19:30, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi there. I reverted your comment on the article's page, seemed like it would be better placed on the Talk page. Or did I miss something? Regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 16:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes
There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes concerning what What should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Personalizing and attributing motive
TFD, you have written several things, and are behaving in a way, that violates AGF. Things like this and this are completely out of line and are getting in the way of dealing with content in the Sanders article. Please stop doing that and deal with the actual content proposals. I don't even know what you mean about "discrediting Sanders". Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)