| Revision as of 18:07, 14 November 2008 editG.-M. Cupertino (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users29,436 edits ←Replaced content with 'Hey, if I've ignored any editors justification it was just because no one would think that "per MOS" is anything at all. If you used Manual of Style instead...'← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:08, 14 November 2008 edit undoDismas (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers79,891 editsm this is my sub page, don't edit it.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==WP:OVERLINK== | |||
| Hey, if I've ignored any editors justification it was just because no one would think that "per MOS" is anything at all. If you used ] instead of expecting people to know what MOS is, that wouldn't happen. I hope it's clear now!... ] (]) 18:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Take of the ] article for instance where Cupertino wikilinked every hobby the person has including links for both "baking" and "cookies". The article is about an actress and has nothing to do with baking or cookies and both are common English words. The links add nothing to the article just as in the "Supply and Demand" example from ] where linking of "potatoes" doesn't add anything to the S&D article. | |||
| ==WP:NPA== | |||
| Secondly, Cupertino has at least twice violated ]. The first as evidenced at the bottom of the page. And the second time on my own talk page . from an edit summary. | |||
| And a ! and ! | |||
| ==WP:MOS== | |||
| Cupertino ignores other editors when guidelines are pointed out such as ]. shows where it was pointed out that episode titles are to be in double quotes and film/television show titles are to be in italics. where the pertinent guidelines are pointed out in the edit summary and this edit was | |||
| ==WP:LOW== | |||
| As part of an informal third opinion type situation, I posted my thoughts about ] on ] of the ] article. Two other editors agreed with me that the "Year in X" type links should be removed from the article. Yet, Cupertino, who keeps the name of an "Admin for emergencies" handy, took ] and ran with it. | |||
| After that filmographies should be in reverse chronological order, Cupertino has to go against this guideline. A second editor has even to them. | |||
| ==Summary== | |||
| I believe that Cupertino's linking of non-notable films/television shows/etc. as well as linking of unrelated common English words are related. They make the article messy and difficult to read. | |||
| Cupertino consistently ignores other editors when guidelines and policies are pointed out. | |||
| Cupertino is argumentative and while they've made several good edits, fights anyone who makes changes to articles which Cupertino disagrees with. | |||
Revision as of 18:08, 14 November 2008
WP:OVERLINK
Take this diff of the Danielle Savre article for instance where Cupertino wikilinked every hobby the person has including links for both "baking" and "cookies". The article is about an actress and has nothing to do with baking or cookies and both are common English words. The links add nothing to the article just as in the "Supply and Demand" example from WP:OVERLINK where linking of "potatoes" doesn't add anything to the S&D article.
WP:NPA
Secondly, Cupertino has at least twice violated WP:NPA. The first as evidenced here at the bottom of the page. And the second time on my own talk page here. Another example from an edit summary.
WP:MOS
Cupertino ignores other editors when guidelines are pointed out such as WP:MOS. This edit shows where it was pointed out that episode titles are to be in double quotes and film/television show titles are to be in italics. Another example where the pertinent guidelines are pointed out in the edit summary and this edit was later undone
WP:LOW
As part of an informal third opinion type situation, I posted my thoughts about WP:LOW on the talk page of the Rachelle Lefèvre article. Two other editors agreed with me that the "Year in X" type links should be removed from the article. Yet, Cupertino, who keeps the name of an "Admin for emergencies" handy, took the words of that admin and ran with it.
After pointing out that filmographies should be in reverse chronological order, Cupertino has continued to go against this guideline. A second editor has even pointed this out to them.
Summary
I believe that Cupertino's linking of non-notable films/television shows/etc. as well as linking of unrelated common English words are related. They make the article messy and difficult to read.
Cupertino consistently ignores other editors when guidelines and policies are pointed out.
Cupertino is argumentative and while they've made several good edits, fights anyone who makes changes to articles which Cupertino disagrees with.