Donald Albury (talk | contribs) ==Reversions in List of city nicknames in the United States== |
|||
Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
:::And what is more [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary]] says absolutely nothing about pronunciation. Many Wikipedia articles include information about pronunciation. Unless you are willing to add the information to Wiktionary, you should stop removing it. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]≠[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 02:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
:::And what is more [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary]] says absolutely nothing about pronunciation. Many Wikipedia articles include information about pronunciation. Unless you are willing to add the information to Wiktionary, you should stop removing it. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]≠[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 02:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
== ==Reversions in List of city nicknames in the United States== == |
|||
{{3RR}} -- '''<font color="navy">[[User:Dalbury|Dalbury]]</font><sup><font color="green">([[User talk:Dalbury|<font color="green">Talk]])</font></font></sup>''' 02:56, 9 January 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:56, 9 January 2006
User talk:Bkonrad/Archive1 February 2004 to 1 April 2004 |
User talk:Bkonrad/Archive6 January 2005 to February 2005 |
Please let me know if you want me to respond on your talk page. I prefer having discussions occur in one place, so I will generally respond to comments on this page, except for pithy chit-chit, where it's not so important to preserve the context of the comments.
This is my talk page and I reserve the right to remove abusive, bothersome, annoying, or inane comments without any response or regrets.
Also, please don't be offended it I don't reply to a comment. I'm often not inclined to chit-chat, and if I don't have anything to say (or at least anything constructive) I may simply not say anything. However, sometimes I may intend to reply later and simply forget, so go ahead and remind me if I seem to have dropped the ball. (BTW, more than one person in RL has made unfavorable comparisons between my conservational skills and that of a wall, so I'm quite used to being nudged to say something.)
Question about Category:Foreign-language newspapers in the United States
Hi Bkonrad, I have a question about a category you created. Please see my post at Category talk:Foreign-language newspapers in the United States and respond there. (I want to make sure I'm not stepping on anybody's toes before I be bold and change something.) Cheers, --Tetraminoe 14:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Peche Island
Out of curiousity, why did you move Peche Island, Ontario, Canada to Peche Island? McNeight 02:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Naming Conventions recommends using disambiguating article titles only when necessary. I'm not aware of any other Peche Island, so it should be at the simplest name, rather than one with two unnecessary disambiguators. older≠wiser 02:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Detroit & Mackinac
Thanks for your edits - as a newcomer to these pages, I'm beginning to understand how these things are set up /s/ Bigturtle
TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Biography
Template:Infobox Biography has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Infobox Biography. Thank you. DreamGuy 07:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Disambiguation articles are not dictionary articles. This is made amply clear in many places. Please stop adding dictionary content to the encyclopaedia. The dictionary is right there. Your complaint that "it isn't in Wiktionary" is not an argument for mis-placing the work in the encyclopaedia instead. Please do lexicographical work in the correct project. If something isn't in Wiktionary, then edit Wiktionary to put it in. (It's a wiki.) Don't put it in Wikipedia instead. Uncle G
- I'm not the one who is removing information that is not available elsewhere. It is incumbent on YOU to put the information into Wiktionary rather than simply deleting it and hiding behind a facile claim of what Wikipedia is not. older≠wiser 02:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- No, it's incumbent on the editor adding the content, which is you and the original author. I'm removing it because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, which is far from "a facile claim". (It's official policy, and a pretty fundamental part of our mission statement.) And I'm not putting it into Wiktionary because it is rubbish. You clearly didn't even read your own edit. Wiktionary can do better pronunciations than this from a standing start. Not only are you putting dictionary content into the wrong project, you are putting bad dictionary content into the wrong project. Please stop. Please adhere to our official policy that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and please stop adding rubbish to Wikipedia just because Wiktionary doesn't have a pronunciation yet and you are unwilling to go to the correct project to add one. Uncle G 02:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, but it is you who are removing content that is not available in Wiktionary. It is unconstructive to remove what you consider to be "dictionary" content and justify such removal by refering to Wiktionary when that content is not in Wiktionary. While you might consider it "rubbish", that is only your opinion. older≠wiser 02:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- And what is more Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary says absolutely nothing about pronunciation. Many Wikipedia articles include information about pronunciation. Unless you are willing to add the information to Wiktionary, you should stop removing it. older≠wiser 02:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
==Reversions in List of city nicknames in the United States==
![Stop icon](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/Stop_hand_nuvola.svg/30px-Stop_hand_nuvola.svg.png)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- Dalbury(Talk) 02:56, 9 January 2006 (UTC)