Revision as of 14:44, 17 January 2018 editGRuban (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers31,502 edits →Carolina Nairne edit: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:00, 18 January 2018 edit undoSagaciousphil (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,311 edits →Admin help: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
: Deepest apologies, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, I could have sworn that I checked that was the correct spelling, but now I see that I hadn't. Thank you for the reversion. --] (]) 14:44, 17 January 2018 (UTC) | : Deepest apologies, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, I could have sworn that I checked that was the correct spelling, but now I see that I hadn't. Thank you for the reversion. --] (]) 14:44, 17 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
== Admin help == | |||
{{Admin help}} | |||
I recently on the ] article that had more or less languished as a copy/paste of the 1911 EB entry for over a decade. An was started on the ] yesterday by {{no ping|GRuban|label1=someone}} who has to the article and whom I wish to avoid having to interact with as I do not wish to perpetuate further hostility (see for a very brief overview as to why, also and ). In light of the warning issued to that user on the first talk page, I'm asking for the help of an admin rather than just another editor, so that my request can be independently appraised beforehand rather than someone then turning round and saying I should not have commented as the RfC was started by said user. To me, the initiation of the RfC feels as if it has been done to further antagonise not only me but to continue a long-standing grievance against another editor by GGTF members, hence the almost immediate calling of an RfC to allow for of that Project and closely with it, in the hope it will provide sufficient baiting to secure an unguarded re-action that might result in a block.<p>Therefore I would like to ask an admin to copy/paste the below comment to the RfC if, in his/her opinion, it's acceptable:<p>Start of comment:<p>'''Carolina'''. The way the article reads now is clear, allowing the reader to easily follow the narrative. As highlighted by other commentators, the essay/guidelines being alluded to are simply advisory. The mandatory imposition of pseudo 'rules' to fall in line with certain Projects or individual's opinions and crusades is not realistic as the writing of each article should address any nuances applicable in that particular instance, which is what has been done here.<p>End of comment.<p>Thanks for any help or advice you may be able to offer. ] - ] 13:00, 18 January 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:00, 18 January 2018
Happy Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you!
Happy Thai Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you!May all your endeavours have a fruitful beginning and prosperous ending! — Ssven2 09:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you, Ssven2, that's very kind. Your message led me to read about the festival, as I hadn't previously been aware of it, so you've helped me learn something too! ;-) SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- They all celebrate the harvest season in our country. A really entertaining set of festivals. — Ssven2 10:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Carolina Nairne edit
: Deepest apologies, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, I could have sworn that I checked that was the correct spelling, but now I see that I hadn't. Thank you for the reversion. --GRuban (talk) 14:44, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Admin help
Administrator help needed
|answered=yes parameter to deactivate the template. |
I recently helped work on the Carolina Nairne article that had more or less languished as a copy/paste of the 1911 EB entry for over a decade. An RfC was started on the talk page yesterday by someone who has little input to the article and whom I wish to avoid having to interact with as I do not wish to perpetuate further hostility (see this user talk page for a very brief overview as to why, also here and here). In light of the warning issued to that user on the first talk page, I'm asking for the help of an admin rather than just another editor, so that my request can be independently appraised beforehand rather than someone then turning round and saying I should not have commented as the RfC was started by said user. To me, the initiation of the RfC feels as if it has been done to further antagonise not only me but to continue a long-standing grievance against another editor by GGTF members, hence the almost immediate calling of an RfC to allow for canvassing of that Project and others closely associated with it, in the hope it will provide sufficient baiting to secure an unguarded re-action that might result in a block.
Therefore I would like to ask an admin to copy/paste the below comment to the RfC if, in his/her opinion, it's acceptable:
Start of comment:
Carolina. The way the article reads now is clear, allowing the reader to easily follow the narrative. As highlighted by other commentators, the essay/guidelines being alluded to are simply advisory. The mandatory imposition of pseudo 'rules' to fall in line with certain Projects or individual's opinions and crusades is not realistic as the writing of each article should address any nuances applicable in that particular instance, which is what has been done here.
End of comment.
Thanks for any help or advice you may be able to offer. SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:00, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Category: