| Revision as of 05:04, 9 April 2009 editTedder (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators62,266 edits →WCYB/WAOW: quick re← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:10, 19 November 2024 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,134,948 edits →ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{bots|deny=DPL bot}} | |||
| {{archives|bot=MiszaBot}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 160K | |maxarchivesize = 160K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 15 | ||
| |minthreadsleft = |
|minthreadsleft = 6 | ||
| |algo = old( |
|algo = old(4d) | ||
| |archive = User talk:Tedder/Archive%(counter)d | |archive = User talk:Tedder/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == ] == | |||
| I have replied to your request. ] (]) | |||
| == Florida Power & Light request == | |||
| == AGV Sports == | |||
| Hi Tedder, I posted a ] based on your feedback regarding manatees and FPL power stations. I was wondering if you'd had a chance to review it. I appreciate any insight you can offer. ] (]) 16:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Hi Tedder, | |||
| :Hey there, your request is in the queue, someone should get to it at some point. ] (]) 20:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Gotcha, thanks for responding. ] (]) 18:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Sortis == | |||
| My name is Julien, I'm a french Student in the IT department of the Ecole Centrale in Lille France. I would like know why you have deleted historical information and important racers names from the ] Misplaced Pages page without giving any reason for that on the talk page? | |||
| I ask that because during my school course I had to present this company for a school paper and I'm very familiar with their history. That's why I can say that the first version of the ] Misplaced Pages page was valuable. | |||
| Moreover you have deleted some valuable reference links and now there is the "Misplaced Pages article issues" tag on the top of the page. | |||
| Finally, why do you choose only this company without the same concern for information about the others Motorcycle apparel companies which are doing blatant advertising on their Misplaced Pages page (] for example ==> lines 5, 9, 13,18, 20). | |||
| Please answer me by giving your reasons and where you get the information on my discussion page? | |||
| I went ahead and created a stub for ], given several red links throughout the project. Happy editing! ---] <sub>(])</sub> 21:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you, | |||
| :Thanks for the heads-up! I'll watch and may contribute, but certainly felt like time. ] (]) 22:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == I have sent you a note about a page you started == | |||
| Julien <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| Hi Tedder. Thank you for your work on ]. Another editor, ], has reviewed it as part of ] and left the following comment: | |||
| :Hi MisterColbalt, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. I gave reasons for the deletions on the ] edit summary. The concern is that the article was ]. Misplaced Pages shouldn't be used for spam, nor should it be used as a laundry list of individuals sponsored by the company. The were per ]: they aren't reliable, primary sources. For instance, . If you want more assistance, let me know. ] (]) 20:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| {{Bq|1=Thank you for creating the article! I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a blessed day!}} | |||
| Hi Tedder, | |||
| To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>SunDawn<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. <small>(Message delivered via the ] tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)</small><!-- Template:Sentnote-NPF --> | |||
| I have read the WP:EL page and would like to note that the article was only meant to read as a historical and informative article in a neutral point of view. I haven’t linked any sites where products are advertised nor sold. So I would like to know what part of the article sounds like an advertisement or has impartial point of view? Also, the racer names that have been deleted from the AGV Sport page were important historical facts to the history of AGV Sports Group. Anyone can see these names and create Wiki page if they like. There isn’t any rule in Misplaced Pages that states you can’t mention names of actual people that are crucial to the development of a company if they do not have their own Wiki page. Furthermore, the critical links that I’ve posted, such as the AGV Helmet Official site ( ) | |||
| or the AGV Helmet Wiki page are important to the history of AGV Sports Group, and were deleted without a notification on why or how or if they even needed to be improved. The external links aren’t a matter of advertisement, but as a reference to the history and evolution of the AGV Sport brand especially in relation to AGV Helmets in Italy. I have linked the logo of the company to specifically reference a legal trademark on a site () to show the relationship and legal differences of logos from AGV Helmets and AGV Sports group and how they evolved from a common brand, logo and history. The use of this site is critical to identify and distinguish the intellectual properties of AGV Helmets and AGV Sports Group. It would also be helpful to describe the improper text or images that are controversial instead of deleting without proper notifying why and what? Such as the important images of Keith Code and the California Superbike School (20 years old) relative to important sponsorships of AGV Sports Group, or the pictures of the first AGV Sport Brochures made in 1985 that show the beginning stages of AGV Sports Group with the AGV Helmet logo. The deletion of the image of the historical CX1 Glove which was a critical point in AGV Helmet -AGV Sport history and evolution was also deleted without any proper reasoning. But the images of Giacomo Agostini in the early 1970’s wearing an AGV helmet and Bates leathers were left on the article that has less relevance compared to the CX1 glove, confusing me why or what your reason or intentions are. Why would a photo of Bates leathers be on the AGV Sport site and not the CX-1 glove. Should the reader think there is a relationship between AGV and Bates or AGV Sport and Bates? It is only creating more problems and making the article more difficult to write. I’m only trying to improve the article, not to advertise or write information that doesn’t have a neutral view. I’ve looked at other wiki site such as Dianese and Alpinestars and others as reference to improve the AGV Sports Group article, however it seems as though they have less historical facts and FAR MORE of a non-neutral view or commercial tone of a bias view than AGV Sports Group, yet they don’t have any tags or issues with their article. Two months prior, there was a tag for revision stating multiple issues with the article. Changes were made and the wiki tag was removed and it was my understanding that the article was legitimate. Now we have more issues and it’s becoming more difficult to write a factually accurate article and to understand why and what the specific problems you believe exist with the article. Please let me know how I can improve the article if we can find a common ground. | |||
| ] ] 07:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| This article is much more than a historical story about the AGVSPORT brand. This is a unique story about a very unusual intellectual property issue that rarely occurs. Two independent companies in foreign countries sharing the same base trade name and history. It has happened very few times like with Rolls Royce Cars and Rolls Royce Aircraft engines. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ==] of ]== | |||
| :Hi Julien, let me sort this out a little bit. | |||
| I have removed the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} tag from ], which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{Tlc|proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at ]. Thanks!<!-- ] --> ] (]) 21:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :* Be careful comparing article A to article B. Just because another article is written poorly isn't an excuse for ''this'' article to be written poorly too. (See ]; it's in terms of deletion of articles, but makes this point very well) | |||
| :* I removed images from the article per ], which says Misplaced Pages isn't meant to be a repository of images. In other words, it shouldn't be an image gallery. I'm sorry if I removed the wrong ones- I was trying to use my intuition on which ones were more or less notable. What's more important is the overall number of images- for an article that length, it should really only have two or three images. An example of a good image-heavy page is ]. There are a lot of images, but they are not in a gallery and don't overwhelm the article. Feel free to substitute "better" images for "worse" ones, but try to keep the overall number somewhat reasonable. | |||
| :* My concern about "advert" is with the AGV Sport article as a whole. It read fairly heavily as a corporate PR piece- something you'd expect to read from AGV Sport, not something that should be on a balanced encyclopedia. Some highlights from ]: "public relations pieces designed to promote a company (..) articles are usually noted for sales-oriented language". The ] cornerstone is very applicable here- notable companies have a good deal of third-party material written about them which can be used to create a neutral point of view about the company, rather than relying upon information from the companies. | |||
| :* Notability of racers and sponsorees(?): if it's just a list of people that AGV Sport has sponsored, it falls under notability criteria. Lists are discouraged in general, but if it '''is''' a list, the individuals need to have clear notability. That can be done within the AGV Sport page, or it can be done on the individual's page. The latter is much more clear, and keeps the notability discussion from dominating the AGV Sport page. If, however, they are central to AGV Sport's history, I'd suggest writing it as a paragraph with ]. Otherwise, simply listing who AGV Sport has sponsored isn't much different than listing who ] hangs out with- it's not entirely encyclopedic. | |||
| :I think I've addressed your main concerns- let me know if I haven't. And if you feel I'm personally being difficult, know that a good course of action is to take it to the AGV Sport talk page and then post to ]'s talk page if you don't hear back from anyone. However, I hope you don't feel that is necessary- I'm very interested in the subject, and I'm trying to keep the AGV Sport article on Misplaced Pages (as I stated on the AGV Sport talk page). | |||
| :Cheers, ] (]) 00:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Invitation to participate in a research == | |||
| Hi Tedder, | |||
| Hello, | |||
| why do you do so many changes on the AGV Sports Group page? What is the purpose to put the citation tag on a year or state of the USA? | |||
| The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''. | |||
| Andy <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| You do not have to be an Administrator to participate. | |||
| :Andy- the idea is to get those facts backed up with ]. Cheers, ] (]) 20:55, 22 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] . | |||
| ] Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Misplaced Pages{{#if:PageName|, as you did to ]}}, you will be ] from editing. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-delete3 --> {{unsigned|AndyRobert86}} | |||
| Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns. | |||
| :Leaving here, but ]. Please take it to the AGV Sport talk page. ] (]) 03:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Kind Regards, | |||
| == Bigweeboy's redlink removal == | |||
| ] | |||
| Hi Tedder: | |||
| <bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi> | |||
| Thanks for your comment on removing red links. I will be more vigilant to see that these links should be removed. I am not trying to create any hard with these changes, simply trying to clean up links that do not exist and where the Wiki entry is quite old, and the likehood of that link being created is small. I'll try to do better. Bigweeboy | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 --> | |||
| == Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research == | |||
| :I replied on your talk page. ] (]) 17:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Hello, | |||
| Thanks Tedder. But how do we know what the chances are that a page will ever be created for a red link? ] (]) | |||
| I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ]. | |||
| :BWB- there is certainly an element of guesswork involved. But you can use the guidelines of ] and ] as a general guideline. In other words, there'll probably never be an article about ], but perhaps there will be one about ] in the future, if she grows up to receive a Nobel Prize. In general, is it possible an article would be created? To use the , it's quite possible those three links ''could'' be created at some point. Hope that helps. Your (other) contributions are excellent- you obviously have an editors' eye, which I don't. ] (]) 21:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Take the survey ''''''. | |||
| Thanks Tedder. I am a new editor and were not familiar with the policy on red links. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I really want to contribute to Wiki and I thought this was a job that helped Wiki get 'cleaned up'. I won't remove any more red links. My reputation on Wiki is important to me and I want to go on record as saying that I innocently removed red links and did not make any other removals like content, templates, I didn't blank out anything, as indicated by your posts on my page. Would you kindly clarify that on my user talk page - that the problem was just red links and it was innocent and I have stopped. Again, many thanks for your help and advice. {{unsigned|Bigweeboy}} | |||
| Kind Regards, | |||
| :No problem- actually, just delete what you want from your user page. Once you've done that, I'll post something complimentary on there. And don't forget to sign your talk page posts with four tildes. ] (]) 16:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| <bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi> | |||
| == Message from RGB == | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 --> | |||
| == ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message == | |||
| Hi Tedder, | |||
| <div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> | |||
| I will do my homework on the process of providing information to this remarkable resource. It wasn't clear to me, however, whether my contributions to the Loyalty Marketing article were accepted. Thanks. ] (]) 06:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div> | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-text"> | |||
| Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| 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. | |||
| :Hi- the problem is that wikipedia has a policy of ], including ]. It's important to draw from ]. Let me know if you have more questions. ] (]) 10:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == High Point Market == | |||
| </div> | |||
| Hi Tedder, | |||
| </div> | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 --> | |||
| I was wondering why a link to our news source covering the High Point Market would be considered "Disruptive" and "Spam". Our publication, Furniture Today is a reputable website with daily coverage of this bi-annual event. If a user is looking for additional information about the event, why would our news coverage be considered spam and any reason to be blacklisted from Misplaced Pages. | |||
| Thank you, | |||
| John <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| * ] / / | |||
| :Hi John. I have a couple of issues. The actual content of furnituretoday may be fine, but it's mired in a couple of issues. First, ]: obviously you are related to the publication. That's okay, but it means you have to follow the COI guidelines very carefully- especially ]. Not that you can't post, but the conflict of interest certainly makes it harder. | |||
| :Second, ] and ]. The furnituretoday site has a ''lot'' of advertising, including an ]. That means any links you add look even more spammy and have a greater conflict of interest, since there is direct gain to be made. | |||
| :Finally, these are both issues that can be overcome (though the interstitial rubs me, and probably others, the wrong way). Your case would be better if you made an effort to contribute to wikipedia outside of areas that you have a conflict of interest. For instance, if you had 50 edits and only one of them was a link to furnituretoday, it'd be a lot easier to ignore. | |||
| :Keep in mind this is all my point of view. If you feel I'm way off base, you can take it to the talk page of the High Point Market. Having said that, I'm not opposed to that link being re-added, since it ''does'' appear to be a ] for this niche industry (i.e., something that isn't going to receive coverage from NYTimes or the Washington Post). But don't be surprised if the amount of advertising and spam causes other editors to reach the same conclusion. | |||
| :So, I'm being verbose. Let me sum up again- you can go ahead and re-add the link, but read the COI and SPAM policies very carefully. | |||
| :Cheers, ] (]) 03:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Tedder, thanks for the great information.. as a Long-time Wiki-User, First-Wiki Editor, I have a lot to learn. I'm currently going through the material you sent, but I am already understanding why my link may be considered Wiki-Spam, even though it is providing valuable information. Thanks again, John <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Excellent, John. Please drop by my talk page again if you have any questions. ] (]) 22:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==JamNow Deletions== | |||
| Hi Tedder, | |||
| I see that you have deleted some links inserted in the From First to Last Page and Haste the Day. I am relatively new to Misplaced Pages so I am just trying to understand the system. I see the pages have links called "Interview w/..." and "Official MySpace page" and I was wondering how this is different from my link. JamNow is a music site which has had several live performances and interviews from signed major artists, similar to MySpace Music. If I was just to list the link as an interview or performance without listing the site name would that be acceptable? This would be fine, but they actually are profiles of artists, and I would not know any other way to convey this. | |||
| Thank you for the help, | |||
| Scott <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Hi Scott, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. The ] actually say that interview links are okay- but where your posts ran afoul is in the ] guidelines. Basically, your edit history implies a possible ], since all you've done is add links to JamNow. | |||
| :Having said that, the links ''are'' useful. I'd suggest making other contributions (not related to JamNow), then gradually add those links back. Figure 50+ ''unrelated'' contributions. These are just my recommendations- again, I feel the links could be helpful, but the rules of ] and ] mean you need to be careful. ] (]) 03:47, 4 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::I completely understand where you were coming from. Thank you for the clarification and help. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi, I think we just had an edit conflict with this. I was tagging it for the mildly dubious claim of being the oldest literary award in the world, and I think the wikipedia monster ate the template. If it was me, I'm sorry. ;o)--]<b><i>]</i></b><sup>]</sup>] 06:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Heh, no worries! Thanks for letting me know. ] (]) 12:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Laurelwood ELs == | |||
| : my theory is as follows: | |||
| * the duplicated EL is the right way to go for important stuff from the infobox. This is how most articles appear to be, both in and outside of the school articles. | |||
| * the inappropriate ELs: outpostcenters might be okay, but not the alumni association; that's no different than a fansite. | |||
| Those are my thoughts, at least. ] (]) 07:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :My explanation for those specific sites is on the talk page. As to the argument that other pages do that, often true, but that only means those need to be fixed, much like most articles on Misplaced Pages used to be unsourced (maybe even still). I know people consider the "official site" to be very important and hence often duplicating it in both the ELs and the infobox, but I've always wondered why? Neither with an "official" link or other links are we trying to drive traffic to these sites, so there is no reason to list it more than once. Same reason for why we only list one URL per domain, people can find it on their own (to me a perfect article has zero ELs and zero "See alsos", but that's just me). And the rationale for the better placement in the infobox is that is a much more prominent spot (plus as here, the domain is also used as a source, thus EL also says not to duplicate in the ELs). As to fan site, I don't think its quite at that level, but I also think it would then meet the "recognized authority" exception, as would most alumni associations of schools. But in general, I think you are doing a great job of removing bad ELs from Oregon pages. Good luck when you get to the college pages, there normally full of EL violations. ] (]) 07:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes, there are usually a lot of EL violations, especially on neglected articles. So there are two bits that make me feel the official site should appear in the infobox AND at the bottom, both from ]: | |||
| ::*2: External links should not normally be used in the body of an article. Instead, include appropriate external links in an "External links" section at the end and/or in the appropriate location within an infobox or navbox. | |||
| ::*What should be linked: Misplaced Pages articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any. | |||
| ::So I read those as saying (a) it's important to have the official site as an EL- if there are any ELs, the first one should be the official site, and (b) duplicating the infobox and the bottom is permissible. Combining (a) and (b) says to me that IF there is an EL section, the first one should be the official site. Does that make sense? | |||
| ::Using the worst argument of all, I picked two featured article high schools, ] and ]. Both have the EL in two places. Again, it's the weakest of arguments, but it's another data point. | |||
| ::I'm going to quit removing alumni associations, but I still feel that booster clubs, school clubs, and single-year reunion websites don't qualify- does that sound correct to you? | |||
| ::Finally, I'll summarize on ] when we are done discussing, but I didn't really feel like having a big discussion about it there. ] (]) 15:13, 8 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::I agree most booster club and the like sites should be removed, though there could be one that might be proper. Just like most alumni sites should be allowed, but there are likely times when those should be removed, such as if it has way too much advertising or the like. | |||
| :::With the #2 point you quote, I see that as saying external links in general (not specific to official ones) should not be in the article, and then if they meet inclusion criteria then there are two places they are allowed to be (EL section or the infobox), and you can have ELs in both places if you want. But that's it, in that it doesn't say you can have the ''same'' EL in both places. And the guideline later states: ...it is normal practice to place the link to that site at the top of the list (if it is not already in an appropriate infobox)"'']] which to me forecloses the issue entirely. But, then taking into account the prohibition of listing sites/URLs more than once, means if you have it in the infobox, then don't have it in the ELs. And yes it is important to have these links, which is why they should be included and at the top of the EL section (if not in the infobox), and this importance is why they are put into the infobox, which is a rather prominent place. In that spot you almost always can view the link without the need to scroll down. But we don't need to list it multiple times. Now, we're always allowed to ignore all rules and say this is just a guideline, but to me this guideline as a whole (at specifically) says to not have any sites, whether official or not, listed multiple times (and why stop at two places if they are really important, why not include it in the lead too and midway through long articles?). ] (]) 21:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I see your logic, and it makes sense why the EL shouldn't be duplicated. And yeah, IAR of course, but.. it's a copout. You are right, the "if it is not already in an appropriate infobox" is the decider. Consider the issue resolved, then! :-) ] (]) 22:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I hope you don't mind me butting in. It's hard to argue with AM's logic. But I have noticed that people kind of expect to see the "official website" listed as the first link in any el section, and well-meaning folks tend to add them when they don't see them, because I don't think they know about the link in the infobox. There's our guidelines, then there's human behavior. My take on it is that I tend to leave the official links the way I found them (one or two, but certainly not three or more) and don't revert folks if they feel like adding them. That's mostly on city articles. That's probably on AM's short list of things I do to piss him off. ;) I do strive for consistency across Oregon articles, so maybe that's something I should work on. Oh, and kudos to you Tedder for taking on all those high school articles! They need clean up, but I hate doing it. Cheers, ] (]) 02:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm open to discussing it more, of course. And thanks for the thanks- editing the articles isn't difficult, but defending them is! ] (]) 02:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Exactly! Opinionated adults are bad enough to deal with, but opinionated alumni? Yikes! ] (]) 02:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==WCYB/WAOW== | |||
| I have reverted edits two the previous as the you linked to as "consensus" isn't quite consensus yet. It is still in the discussion stage and we should wait until everything plays out before going and reverting users edits and calling it consensus. With WP:TVS, I would give it a week (as it is not a well traveled talk page) before we seen whether it is consensus or not. Thanks...<small style="border:1px solid #990000;padding:1px;">] • ] • April 9, 2009 @ 03:22</small> | |||
| :I understand the lack of consensus, however removing it also follows the ] pattern. ] (]) 03:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Don't believe I am familiar with the "RVB pattern". - <small style="border:1px solid #990000;padding:1px;">] • ] • April 9, 2009 @ 03:48</small> | |||
| :::Hey, how about ]. Doh! Too much going on. ] (]) 03:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::::No worries :) That I am familiar with. I always have too much going on. As for "BRD", I am respect the boldness, I just always err on the side of caution when it comes to making edits before discussions end because you think they are going one way and you leave and come back and they have gone a whole 'nother direction and you have to revert your edits. So, I always wait until after everyone has a say and everyone figures out the consensus, then I edit. But I respect the boldness :) - <small style="border:1px solid #990000;padding:1px;">] • ] • April 9, 2009 @ 04:27</small> | |||
| :::::You are right- the real sin was claiming consensus. I'm not claiming the boldness for myself, I'm claiming the revertness, especially when the images ] a little spammy. ] (]) 04:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I pretty much reverted based on the decoration argument more than anything else and the previous argument made on the talk page. It isn't a local logo, it's very tiny, and we have a perfectly fine logo on the network article instead of that low-quality one. <font face="Myriad Web">''']''' <span style="color:dark blue">•</span> <small>''(])''</small></font> 05:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I have no problem with that- it was more FYI so you knew there was some discussion going on. And again, reverting follows the ] pattern anyhow. ] (]) 05:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 00:10, 19 November 2024
 Archives | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
Florida Power & Light request
Hi Tedder, I posted a follow up based on your feedback regarding manatees and FPL power stations. I was wondering if you'd had a chance to review it. I appreciate any insight you can offer. 2601:581:8400:98E0:98AB:459C:3666:3CC3 (talk) 16:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hey there, your request is in the queue, someone should get to it at some point. tedder (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Gotcha, thanks for responding. FPL Daniel (talk) 18:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Sortis
I went ahead and created a stub for Sortis Holdings, given several red links throughout the project. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up! I'll watch and may contribute, but certainly felt like time. tedder (talk) 22:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hi Tedder. Thank you for your work on Ziklag (nonprofit). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Thank you for creating the article! I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a blessed day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Deprodding of Montessori in Thailand
I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Montessori in Thailand, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Left guide (talk) 21:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in a research
Hello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Kind Regards,
BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research
Hello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Take the survey here.
Kind Regards,
BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. 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 site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)