| Revision as of 05:43, 28 December 2019 editHijiri88 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,390 edits →Out of curiosity← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:19, 31 December 2019 edit undoHijiri88 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,390 edits →Four tildes, not three: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 181: | Line 181: | ||
| :I often check the contributions of admins I admire, and he's been doing good work for a long time. It's not very often that a serving admin comes back up for nomination, so I certainly wanted to vote for him. I don't see why it's that unusual. ] (]) 04:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC) | :I often check the contributions of admins I admire, and he's been doing good work for a long time. It's not very often that a serving admin comes back up for nomination, so I certainly wanted to vote for him. I don't see why it's that unusual. ] (]) 04:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC) | ||
| ::Okay, well then how do you explain ? Did you follow me to the article and make that nonsense comment? Or did you simply miscount? Are you aware that Misplaced Pages is not a democracy and consensus is not a vote-count? ] (<small>]]</small>) 05:43, 28 December 2019 (UTC) | ::Okay, well then how do you explain ? Did you follow me to the article and make that nonsense comment? Or did you simply miscount? Are you aware that Misplaced Pages is not a democracy and consensus is not a vote-count? ] (<small>]]</small>) 05:43, 28 December 2019 (UTC) | ||
| == Four tildes, not three == | |||
| {{Uw-tilde}} | |||
Revision as of 01:19, 31 December 2019
Welcome!
|
That was a terrible close
Re this.
Two users expressed some opinion as to whether the article was GA-quality, one openly in favour of delisting and the other not opposed to delisting and stating that the original listing was crap. None of the other comments were even related to whether the article as it stood was of GA-quality or not. So why did you close it as a "maintain the status quo" when everyone opposed the status quo.
I understand you probably made a good-faith mistake, but if so it was still a mistake, and I strongly urge you to revert your close.
Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 09:43, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Users were arguing about the article content, but not all of it actually related to whether or not the article's quality was low enough to delist. Discussion had gone on long enough, and no one but the nominator said that the article should be delisted. No consensus means 'keep'.
Challenger.rebecca (talk) 06:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Okay, firstly I should apologize for my gruff tone above. I was annoyed about some bullshit that had nothing to do with you or the GAR. Secondly, you should know that GARs do not need a broad consensus from a large number of users to delist. The default should be that if an article's GA status is challenged, it will be delisted unless either (a) a defense of the article's current GA status is mounted or (b) the article is improved to fully address the OP's concerns. In this case, one user challenged the GA status, and another user tried to improve the article but still agreed the article should be delisted. A GAR should never be decided on a vote count, but in this case even a vote count was in favour of delisting. If I were closing, I would have said Consensus is to delist. The valid concerns of the OP and first commenter have not been met. All other commenters are trouted and politely reminded that this page is for discussion of whether the article still meets (or ever met) our specific list of Good Article criteria, and is not a forum for general discussion of the topic, or even general discussion of the article and its quality. 'No consensus means keep' is for AFD, not GAR, as the burden of consensus must lie with those who want Misplaced Pages to continue hyping the article as one of the Project's finest. If 'No consensus means preserve the status quo' was a universal standard, the article would never have been promoted in the first place. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 05:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- There were competing arguments there over the validity of the nominator's claims, but I checked the article myself and found the citations to be fine and the article to be decently organized. No one except the nominator ever said that the article should be delisted. If people want to change the title of the article, they can propose it on the talk page, but there was definitely no consensus and probably no good reason to outright delist.
- There is no reason why you should be posting attacks on me about this reassessment on other univolved users talk pages. During all the good article reassessments I closed, I took special care to consider all angles and made the best decision possible. Challenger.rebecca (talk) 21:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- Okay, if any of the above looked like an attack, it was unintentional, and I apologize. Anyway, I find your analysis of the GAR and the article itself to be questionable. I'm not in the mood to argue this further. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Challenger.rebecca. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Inappropriate marking of "Minor" updates
Thank you for your contributions to the article Brampton Library. You marked your all your edits on March 28, 2017 as minor, when in fact only the first edit on that day was. Marking an edit as minor is intended to allow some editors to avoid being notified about spelling fixes, punctuation updates, grammar improvements, small amounts of reformatting, and other small changes to articles that do not change the intent and information contained in the article. Adding new content is generally not considered a minor edit, so should not be marked as such. Please review the minor edits article to help improve the quality of your future contributions. Nutster (talk) 08:40, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge submissions
The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada will soon be reaching its first-anniversary. Please consider submitting any Canada-related articles you have created or improved since November 2016. Please try to ensure that all entries are sourced with formatted citations and no unsourced claims.
You may submit articles using this link for convenience. Thank-you, and please spread the word to those you know who might be interested in joining this effort to improve the quality of Canada-related articles. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Challenger.rebecca. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Challenger.rebecca. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Your edits to Anxiotropic
- (1) We do not capitalize all words in section titles.
- (2) After editing, please read the place you edited. In this article, you corrupted format.
I fixed these. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention (October 22)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Misplaced Pages's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Misplaced Pages's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello, Challenger.rebecca! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Misplaced Pages where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -Liance 03:46, 22 October 2019 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Out of curiosity
Would you be willing to explain where you have "seen in action for many years" (per this)?
You and he have never interacted, and you have virtually no WP-space editing history to indicate that you've generally been aware of his administrative actions despite that.
I ask because it seems somewhat weird that you would choose that to be your first ever (and thus far only) RFA comment shortly after I posted this in my sandbox and a few months later (today) you showed up and reverted an edit I had made to a relatively low-traffic article three days prior.
Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:47, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- I often check the contributions of admins I admire, and he's been doing good work for a long time. It's not very often that a serving admin comes back up for nomination, so I certainly wanted to vote for him. I don't see why it's that unusual. Challenger.rebecca (talk) 04:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, well then how do you explain this? Did you follow me to the article and make that nonsense comment? Or did you simply miscount? Are you aware that Misplaced Pages is not a democracy and consensus is not a vote-count? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 05:43, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
Four tildes, not three
Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. When you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button
located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you.