| Revision as of 14:34, 14 February 2009 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 1 thread(s) (older than 7d) to User talk:Kotniski/Archive 2.← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:48, 14 February 2009 edit undoOhconfucius (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers328,947 edits →Extra! Extra! Read all bout it!Next edit → | ||
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
| Well done on your work on poland. You are doing brillaint work that would never be created otherwise. I just came across you while seeing the poland articles you have created. You therefore deserve this barnstar. | Well done on your work on poland. You are doing brillaint work that would never be created otherwise. I just came across you while seeing the poland articles you have created. You therefore deserve this barnstar. | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| === Extra! Extra! Read all bout it! === | |||
| . ] (]) 16:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:48, 14 February 2009
| Talk page policy: I dislike seeing only one side of a discussion on a page. If I put a message on your talk page, I will be watching that page for a reply. If you leave a message here, I will reply here, unless you request otherwise. |
|---|
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Policy/guideline/information page/essay classification
Per this discussion, what do you think of my idea to limit policies to WP:3RR and its exemptions? I've been thinking that maybe a new classification should be created for NPOV, V, and OR. In practice they are not exactly policies. I also think that WP:NPA, WP:HARASS, and WP:CIVIL should be demoted to behavioral guidelines, simply because what constitutes a violation is often unclear. Perhaps we could go through them and figure out what is truly non-negotiable and make that into a single policy. PSWG1920 (talk) 17:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I see your logic, but I don't think you'll get people to agree to anything that looks like "downgrading" such core policies as NPOV, V and OR. Personally I would still prefer to abolish all distinctions, and simply provide a uniform set of pages that document properly and readably what kinds of content and behaviour are expected on Misplaced Pages. I don't actually think anything is non-negotiable, even 3RR (offenders are not always blocked automatically). --Kotniski (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- I thought of another practical distinction which could be made. Violation of policies (usually repeated violations) could directly result in a block, whereas persistent violation of guidelines could result in at most a ban if an admin deemed it warranted (the subsequent breach of which could lead to a block.) In my idea, that could work, but that's not the way it is now. PSWG1920 (talk) 18:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages Signpost, February 8, 2009
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (geographic names)
Your improvements to the guideline are great. Sorry to have been such a stubborn mule about the lists, but ultimately I think having two lists is unnecessarily confusing to the users of this page, even if I appreciate the logic of why you proposed the split in the first place. In retrospect, though, you were right about not organizing it by continent. But I'm actually posting here to get a handle on your edit summary that read "in these countries tags are used even if *disambiguation* is not required". I don't disagree with your subsequent edit to that sentence (I was really just trying to get rid of the awkward sentence structure that predated your recent spate of edits), but I'm puzzled about the distinction you are making between tags and disambiguation. What tags? I could just be missing the obvious here, but I'm not following your logic so I thoughT I would ask (mostly out of curiosity). Regards. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- OK, maybe you're right about the two lists. What I have in mind about tags and disambiguation is that U.S. towns (for example) are obliged by convention to take the ", State" tag just by virtue of their being U.S. towns, regardless of whether any disambiguation is needed. So if some town in Texas is the only thing in the world called Frugsville, we still name the article Frugsville, Texas - the tag is required (by our conventions), but "disambiguation" here is not. I think the wording of that section still needs tightenining up, but I'd like to get the matter of rivers and lakes sorted out so we can deal with all the cases.--Kotniski (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Hyphens
Thank-you very-much! I would-never-have been able-to manage-that code... Bencherlite 13:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Plants disambig
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
poland location creations
|
The Polish barnstar | |
| For craeting so many thousands of articles on polish villages. 02blythed (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Well done on your work on poland. You are doing brillaint work that would never be created otherwise. I just came across you while seeing the poland articles you have created. You therefore deserve this barnstar. |
Extra! Extra! Read all bout it!
Even Rubin and Cole say Tennis expert has lost it. Ohconfucius (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)