| Revision as of 23:14, 21 November 2016 editMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,459 edits →ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:42, 28 November 2016 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,448 editsm Archiving 3 discussion(s) to User talk:A.amitkumar/Archive 4 - -) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> | Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> | ||
| == In reply to a vandalism reversal earlier this month == | |||
| Hey, made an account since apparently I was an IP user previously. Haven't done more than read Misplaced Pages til now, so haven't bothered with an account. Anyway, I wanted to say that I am sorry about the incident on the page, and that it surprised me, as I neither remember viewing the page nor making an edit to it. It is possible that since there are many computers on our home's intranet, another family member may be the one who made the edit, though this to me seems rather unlikely, especially considering the nature of the edit. Lastly, I would just like to thank you for the warning and information, for your contributions to keeping Misplaced Pages vandalism-free. :) <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ==Arrival== | |||
| Please see ], quoting ]. --] (]) 18:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| : Quite self contradictory section of ] since it does say this too which seems that upcoming films and lost films are eligible to have a plot summary too... Any lost movies which is not available to general public shouldn't have a plot summary? I think just because it has happened elsewhere or some other time doesn't warrant putting the same reasoning for every edit and trying to own the article using similar predicaments. | |||
| Exceptions to the rule include upcoming films and "lost" films (which are not available to the public to verify), for which editors should use secondary sources. | |||
| <span style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;">]]</span> 19:41, 9 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :Grant you the MOS is confusing. But by standing consensus, not least of all because of copyright issues that the studios can press, WikiProject Film editors wait for the general release. In any case, once reverted, you go to the article talk page to convince fellow editors to reach a consensus to include the plot before the movie is released. You're absolutely welcome to try. --] (]) 16:47, 10 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :: Thanks... to the power of consensus :-). The majority of fools which i call now and then. The plot has no copyright... since it is written by us editors and cannot be a copy edit from somewhere else which the synopsis currently is.... I will rather wait till end of day today till the movies official public release. <span style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;">]]</span> 17:04, 10 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == ]: Voting now open! == | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, A.amitkumar. Voting in the ''']''' 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 ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/33&oldid=750620269 --> | |||
Revision as of 04:42, 28 November 2016
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
WP is not a place for knowledge gathering anymore, by arguing here you agree to be one of the assholes messing up WP This user is no longer very active on Misplaced Pages.
Dash
Hello. I didn't include a source about the French usage of dash because it is a wide-spread common knowledge about the French language: any source would be only ERROR sorry . I have re-entered the section because I thought its removal was the result of a bug. If you still think you know better than me, then remove it again, and I won't keep insisting. (in the version you "deleted", i however mentioned novellist George Simenon.)
Nomination of Software in retail for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Software in retail is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Software in retail until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.