This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Skyring (talk | contribs) at 05:05, 30 September 2015 (Reverted 2 edits by Dennis Bratland (talk) to last revision by GoodDay. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 05:05, 30 September 2015 by Skyring (talk | contribs) (Reverted 2 edits by Dennis Bratland (talk) to last revision by GoodDay. (TW))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Elizabeth II
...and I believed that finally commonsense had come to that article's intro. Now, I fear it's going to be stuck with that 'odd' looking version, which merely panders to a few Canadians ;) GoodDay (talk) 03:29, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- The unicorn, the lion and all the king's horses could have agreed that, egg-wise, there may be a proverb or axiom about an honest state of mind which can sometimes result in a deficient sense of proportion when it comes to editing certain topics, or taking part in discussion. Qexigator (talk) 08:04, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- It appears that progress is being stalled, by two individuals :( GoodDay (talk) 22:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- I agree, but let's proceed via wikiprocess. Identify various candidate versions of the lede, put them to an RfC, and gauge support. I'm seeing a definite desire for a change, but not the details of any particular version. I think it would be wrong to leave the thing as it stands because we can't work out the model most of us want. --Pete (talk) 22:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Clarify: Are you & Track, asking me to hold off from opinoning on the proposed versions, until they're listed? GoodDay (talk) 22:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- I had fondly imagined that I was merely compiling a list of the various versions which have appeared or been proposed, and that discussion would take place once we had assembled a list complete enough hat nobody felt their preference had been omitted. The difficulties and modifications of attempting to make such a list whilst other editors were expressing their views and holding conversations quickly drained my enthusiasm. I may resume when I have fresh heart, I may go and become a gypsie. Either alternative is equally likely, though the delightful weather here gives the latter an extra sparkle. --Pete (talk) 02:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
- Clarify: Are you & Track, asking me to hold off from opinoning on the proposed versions, until they're listed? GoodDay (talk) 22:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- I agree, but let's proceed via wikiprocess. Identify various candidate versions of the lede, put them to an RfC, and gauge support. I'm seeing a definite desire for a change, but not the details of any particular version. I think it would be wrong to leave the thing as it stands because we can't work out the model most of us want. --Pete (talk) 22:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- It appears that progress is being stalled, by two individuals :( GoodDay (talk) 22:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Forgive my slight frustrations there. But, having stared at the absurd "Queen of 16..." version for several months, certaintly tried my patience :) GoodDay (talk) 22:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
- That's fine. I often find that if I step away from the keyboard for a bit, my subconscious mind will sort things out and find a better way of saying something than what my conscious mind insists is the first and best way forward. Sleeping on a problem, in particular, is often extremely valuable. --Pete (talk) 22:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
- There's something rather bullying about that Track fellow's approach. GoodDay (talk) 01:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Eliot Higgins
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eliot Higgins. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)