| Revision as of 01:12, 19 May 2007 editStephen Bain (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,147 edits Re: Closure question← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:55, 19 May 2007 edit undoJc37 (talk | contribs)Administrators49,012 edits responded on their talk pageNext edit → | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| ::For me it depends on the size of the list. Up to about 50 articles, a copy-and-regex approach usually seems to feel like the least work, but once the category sprawls beyond one page, then AWB wins for me by making the list in two steps (cretae list from category, then save list to a text file, where it comes out preformatted). If I already a spare instance of AWB running, then I'll enerally use AWB even for quite a short list. But that's just me, try whatever works for you :) --] <small>] • (])</small> 09:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC) | ::For me it depends on the size of the list. Up to about 50 articles, a copy-and-regex approach usually seems to feel like the least work, but once the category sprawls beyond one page, then AWB wins for me by making the list in two steps (cretae list from category, then save list to a text file, where it comes out preformatted). If I already a spare instance of AWB running, then I'll enerally use AWB even for quite a short list. But that's just me, try whatever works for you :) --] <small>] • (])</small> 09:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == Re: Closure question == | |||
| (I'm intentionally staying out of the content discussion.) - In reading your closure of ], your comments would seem to suggest that you you disagree with ]'s previous DRV closure. In your opinion, do you feel that that is a valid reason to close an AfD? Please don't take this as accusatory in any way, I'm more on a "fact finding mission", as it were. - ] 20:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| : is the second nomination as it originally appeared (the nomination was later ). Xoloz seemed to be drawing from the (minority of) people in the DRV who said the article should be relisted that early closures were a problem and the matter should be left to run for a full 5 days. There was no call for this because there had already been ample discussion directly about the content (over more than 13 days) at both the first AfD and the DRV. | |||
| :Now I really don't think it should matter whether the discussion occurred on the AfD page or on the DRV page, or whether it occurred in any given 120 hour span; it occurred, and considered altogether the result was clear. --] (]) 01:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:55, 19 May 2007
Memorable comments from discussions I've been in:
- I flipped a three-sided coin, it came up "no consensus". --Kbdank71 20:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC) (From User talk:Kbdank71)
- Outline my position, which is actually built on a big pile of marbles in a game of kerplunk and the straws are slowly being pulled - Steve block 08:49, 17 November 2006 (From an edit summary)
- While the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may be useful for other XfD discussions, it isn't as useful for CfD, due to a commonality of consistancy due to prior consensus. The guideline WP:OCAT is an excellent example of this. And the same seems true for WP:ALLORNOTHING. - jc37 17:12, 9 April 2007
Pages worth reading:
- Fighting is boring
- The Last Commandment
- Logical fallacy and Appeal to emotion
- The Golden Rule and WikiLove
Thank you for defending CatDiffuse
Thank you for your defense of CatDiffuse: I had no idea it was up for deletion, and I am amazed at the response it has generated. I invite you to review and participate in WP:∫, to bring order to Misplaced Pages. Cwolfsheep 05:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Portal peer review
Hello, Jc37! Since it has been a month since you nominated the Comics portal for peer review, I hope you received good feedback on how the portal could be improved. If you would like, you could keep the portal listed at the portal peer review for more suggestions for improvement and ask the Wikipedians here for feedback. Also, if you think the portal is ready, you could nominate the portal for featured status. Either way, I hope you've received helpful reviews! Cheers, S.D. ¿п? § 01:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
The XfD Barnstar
|
The XfD Barnstar | |
| I don't think I gave you one of these... Well, you really deserve one ;-) Snowolf CON - 18:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC) |
wow
Your closing rationale on the Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_14#Fictional characters by power was mightily impressive.--Mike Selinker 15:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Re Listification
Hi again jc37,
- There are some categories ready for listification on the working page. I know you've done some in the past, is there an simple way to do this? - jc37 13:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The few I've done were by copy-paste then search-replace in a plain-text editor (to remove whitespace, create links, etc) from the category page, i.e. manually, followed by subst:ing {{Ctlf}} to create a basic "List of" page. Whether this is the simplest (or even a simple) method, I don't know; there may be a technique/template/macro or the like that automates the process entirely... perhaps something like WP:AWB could be (or has been!) coaxed to do so... In a nutshell, I guess my answer is an incredibly useful "maybe", although if there isn't an automated technique/template/macro/AWB/etc setup, it's something to add to a to-do list somewhere! Yours, David (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- AWB is a bit rubbish, but it does work. Usually I prefer cut'n'paste. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- For me it depends on the size of the list. Up to about 50 articles, a copy-and-regex approach usually seems to feel like the least work, but once the category sprawls beyond one page, then AWB wins for me by making the list in two steps (cretae list from category, then save list to a text file, where it comes out preformatted). If I already a spare instance of AWB running, then I'll enerally use AWB even for quite a short list. But that's just me, try whatever works for you :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)