| Revision as of 01:40, 28 August 2007 editMufka (talk | contribs)68,871 edits →RE:← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:27, 29 August 2007 edit undoAlgisKuliukas (talk | contribs)220 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| {{Archive box|]}} | {{Archive box|]}} | ||
| Mufka, why have you taken out (twice) my insertion of 5th March to note that this was the day that a well known idea about human evolution was first advanced? For those of us who are interested in human evolution it is quite a significant day. It signals the start of an alternative idea to the 'savannah theory' of human evolution which some of us think will eventually supercede that notion and become the standard explanation of ape-human divergence taught to students everywhere. | |||
| Wonder what the reason is for your removal of popular culture references to November 5th. There are enough to support it as a subsection. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) {{{Time|03:16, August 24, 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Wonder what the reason is for your removal of popular culture references to November 5th. There are enough to support it as a subsection. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) {{{Time|03:16, August 24, 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
Revision as of 05:27, 29 August 2007
| This is Mufka's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 |
 Archives |
Mufka, why have you taken out (twice) my insertion of 5th March to note that this was the day that a well known idea about human evolution was first advanced? For those of us who are interested in human evolution it is quite a significant day. It signals the start of an alternative idea to the 'savannah theory' of human evolution which some of us think will eventually supercede that notion and become the standard explanation of ape-human divergence taught to students everywhere.
Wonder what the reason is for your removal of popular culture references to November 5th. There are enough to support it as a subsection. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.10.252.15 (talk) 03:16, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
- New sections should be discussed before they are added to the Wikicalendar articles. Otherwise the consistency of the articles will be difficult to maintain. -- Mufka 10:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- not aware there is any rule for that. For some dates but not others such a section will be relevant. DGG (talk) 03:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- Have a look here. It is where all of the discussion on Wikicalendar content takes place and it's the closest thing to a set of rules. Basically changes in format or structure are frowned upon without consensus. This is mostly in an effort to keep the articles consistent and ideally changes would be applied to all 366 of the articles. -- Mufka 03:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- not aware there is any rule for that. For some dates but not others such a section will be relevant. DGG (talk) 03:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I think i stumbled upon this IP dynamically ... how do i hide this message or somehow atone for the sins of the person before me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.111.211.202 (talk) 04:55, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the warning from December 2006. -- Mufka 10:50, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Wiki Post
Where do I sign up for Wiki Post to be foreword to my talk page. Sory about poor writing, I havent been on here for a few months.User:HarebagUser:Wiki-wikifyUser:69.145.163.26 19:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- I assume that you are referring to Signpost. Check out Template:Signpost-subscription. -- Mufka 03:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
RE:
The start date of the Olympics are very much notable as many independent, reliable sources document the fact — not to mention the numerous sources constructing the stadiums in Beijing. I also believe that the Olympics are notable enough to deserve a mention in the article even if they haven't started. Regards. –Animum 00:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- You seem to be forgetting the most important bit: Wikiproject consensus — a wikiproject that only has 8 members, btw, so the term "consensus" is used loosely — does not dictate any form of policy whatsoever. –Animum 00:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Could you please direct me to the community discussion where the consensus was decided? (feel free to reply here, or at Animum's page) Martinp23 00:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- The "membership" is truly a joke. I'm not really sure why it is there. Discussion on the topic takes place here. In my experience it is the understanding of all of the active Wikicalendar "patrollers" that if anything the future event rule is the one true "rule". I suggest any further discussion on this be done there. -- Mufka 00:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Please continue this discussion here. Thanks. -- Mufka 01:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- The "membership" is truly a joke. I'm not really sure why it is there. Discussion on the topic takes place here. In my experience it is the understanding of all of the active Wikicalendar "patrollers" that if anything the future event rule is the one true "rule". I suggest any further discussion on this be done there. -- Mufka 00:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Could you please direct me to the community discussion where the consensus was decided? (feel free to reply here, or at Animum's page) Martinp23 00:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)