Revision as of 20:29, 21 January 2016 editGoodDay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers493,047 edits →Re: WP:BOXING← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:05, 23 January 2016 edit undoReywas92 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers81,012 edits →AFD: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
I guess they're here to stay, for now, but the 'non-consensus' was left very hazy with regards to sovereign flags and which flags to use for boxers using multiple nationalities. There simply was no agreement on either of those issues. Whenever it next comes up, I'll be sure to latch onto it and make as much of a fuss as possible (no joke) so that maybe in a future 'RfC rematch', more editors will see sense and support getting rid of the damn things. ] (]) 20:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC) | I guess they're here to stay, for now, but the 'non-consensus' was left very hazy with regards to sovereign flags and which flags to use for boxers using multiple nationalities. There simply was no agreement on either of those issues. Whenever it next comes up, I'll be sure to latch onto it and make as much of a fuss as possible (no joke) so that maybe in a future 'RfC rematch', more editors will see sense and support getting rid of the damn things. ] (]) 20:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
:Perhaps, it's best next time, to concentrate on which flags to use, sovereign or non-sovereign. Again, most of the commotion over that, will be around usage of the British flag. ] (]) 20:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC) | :Perhaps, it's best next time, to concentrate on which flags to use, sovereign or non-sovereign. Again, most of the commotion over that, will be around usage of the British flag. ] (]) 20:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
== AFD == | |||
As you previously participated in a related discussion, you may be interested in ]. <font color="#1EC112">]</font><sup><font color="#45E03A">]</font></sup> 23:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:05, 23 January 2016
|
Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC).
This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 19 years, 1 month and 11 days. |
You may be wondering why my archives only start at August 2007. The reason: I didn't archive my pages before that date, I merely deleted them (as I didn't know how to archive). Therefore, if anyone wishes to see material before August 2007? check out this talkpage's 'history'.
Awards
I've an Awards page, where I keep a list of Misplaced Pages awards bestowed upon me.
Edit count & Pie chart
My Arbcom Case
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay
Archives |
Aug-Sept 2007 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
Hello, GoodDay. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I was right all along,. HA!!!!
Long live canada!
Jeremy Corbyn
I recommend you avoid involvement in UK-related articles. Going on past experience, it will only end in tears. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- It won't end up in tears. GoodDay (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- BTW Ghmyrtle, no matter what the outcome of that Rfc, I'll be content. If it's to be United Kingdom? no prob as that's Corbyn's birth-country. However, if it's to be England? again no prob, as many Canadian & American bio infoboxes, use only locations like Edmonton, Alberta or Dallas, Texas, for example. The Canadian bio infoboxes tend to use city-province/territory & the American bio infoboxes tend to use city-state. It's not an overly big deal when British bio infoboxes use city-constituent country. GoodDay (talk) 17:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
MDY: comma after year
I've reverted your recent edit to Tanya Cook, in which you removed a comma after the date "November 9, 1964". According to MOS:COMMA, dates written in MDY format require a comma after the year, unless it's followed by other punctuation instead. If you've removed other such commas recently, could you please go back and revert your removals? Thanks. — Ammodramus (talk) 03:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I've been removing overusage of commas on a lot of articles, for years. I doubt I can go back & undo. GoodDay (talk) 03:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- This isn't removing overusage of commas; this is removing commas that're called for by MOS.
- Note that I raised this issue on your talk page in July 2015 (User_talk:GoodDay/Archive_37#Comma_after_year), at which time you said that there was no way you could go back and reverse so many changes. In view of that, could I urge you to go back and restore the commas after MDY dates that you've removed since last July? Thanks. — Ammodramus (talk) 04:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I gnome edit randomly. You're free to revert any such edits that I may have made since July 2015. GoodDay (talk) 04:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Is there a name in Wikitaxonomy for editors who follow gnomes around and fix their problem edits? Metagnomes? Gnomognomes? What would the userbox look like? — Ammodramus (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I don't know, but I'm alright with you fixing up any of my gnome edits. GoodDay (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Cool. But seriously, isn't making minor improvements the essence of gnomery? Edits that violate MOS can hardly be called "improvements", even if the minor-edit box is checked. Removing necessary commas after MDY dates isn't gnomery, but its opposite, however well-intentioned. — Ammodramus (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I've had conflicting advise in the past, concerning the MOS-in-question. You're free to 'fix up' any of my edits that you see as being erroneous. GoodDay (talk) 04:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Checked your talk-page archive for "comma", and found some of that "conflicting advice": in User_talk:GoodDay/Archive_34#Desist_meaningless_mucking_about, Isaacl says that "I think I recall that Misplaced Pages's manual of style specifies" no comma after a date in MDY format.
- Unless the guideline has been changed since 2013, Isaacl recalled wrong. The MOS seems fairly unambiguous about it, both in the table at MOS:YEAR and in the correct-incorrect example pair at MOS:COMMA. I'd suggest that unless and until another editor can point to a specific passage in the MOS that supports no-comma-after-MDY, we take comma-after-MDY as required. — Ammodramus (talk) 14:27, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I believe I was thinking of a different scenario in trying to explain why some different advice may have been received previously. I did not clarify further in that discussion since the topic under discussion was regarding listing birth and death dates.
- GoodDay, I suggest that it would be helpful for you to take into account the appropriate style guidance in your edits from here on? isaacl (talk) 17:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'm just going to try to avoid it all together & concentrate on fixing the dashs between the dates. PS: My cutting down the commas, looks better though. GoodDay (talk) 17:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I've had conflicting advise in the past, concerning the MOS-in-question. You're free to 'fix up' any of my edits that you see as being erroneous. GoodDay (talk) 04:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Cool. But seriously, isn't making minor improvements the essence of gnomery? Edits that violate MOS can hardly be called "improvements", even if the minor-edit box is checked. Removing necessary commas after MDY dates isn't gnomery, but its opposite, however well-intentioned. — Ammodramus (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I don't know, but I'm alright with you fixing up any of my gnome edits. GoodDay (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Is there a name in Wikitaxonomy for editors who follow gnomes around and fix their problem edits? Metagnomes? Gnomognomes? What would the userbox look like? — Ammodramus (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- I gnome edit randomly. You're free to revert any such edits that I may have made since July 2015. GoodDay (talk) 04:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Is there a version of Poe's law for punctuation? — Ammodramus (talk) 21:37, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure. GoodDay (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
David Souter
I apologize! So it is typical for this type of article to read as "appointed by the president" - which would be the process of nominating and confirming? Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 16:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- As I understand it, the president nominates the person for judgeship or the Supreme Court & the nominee has to be confirmed by the US Senate, before he/she can assume that post. It's due to seperation of powers. I had to fix up the few SC bios that had appointed in them, as the rest used nominated. BTW, if you want, we could ask Misplaced Pages:WikiProject United States courts and judges what would be best for all the Chief Justices & associate justices to have in their infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 17:00, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Re: WP:BOXING
I guess they're here to stay, for now, but the 'non-consensus' was left very hazy with regards to sovereign flags and which flags to use for boxers using multiple nationalities. There simply was no agreement on either of those issues. Whenever it next comes up, I'll be sure to latch onto it and make as much of a fuss as possible (no joke) so that maybe in a future 'RfC rematch', more editors will see sense and support getting rid of the damn things. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- Perhaps, it's best next time, to concentrate on which flags to use, sovereign or non-sovereign. Again, most of the commotion over that, will be around usage of the British flag. GoodDay (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
AFD
As you previously participated in a related discussion, you may be interested in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/United States presidential election, 2024. Reywas92 23:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)