Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:41, 3 August 2009

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following: Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page. Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end. Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed. Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply. ⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

About "junk, lack of notability"

Hello,

you remove Limonade because of "junk, lack of notability". Sure it's a pretty young project but there is a little comunity that's growing fast (essentially through Twitter and Github). When do you consider a project is "mature" enough to be inserted in this list ? Is the popularity is the only criteria to share informations about a framework in this page ?

Thks, Fabrice Luraine (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC) Fabrice

Hello, I'm Hm2k. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Comparison of web application frameworks‎, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Hm2k (talk) 17:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

SuperFlexible

Please note my comment at the discussion page PizzaMan (talk) 14:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I have replied. --Hm2k (talk) 14:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Icon editors

You are claiming that @icon sushi and IconBuilder are icon editors. Just try to use them to understand that they are not editors. The former is an image-to-icon converter with limited capabilities to correct the result; the latter is a plugin for Adobe Photoshop which allows you to export images into icon file formats. You cannot edit an icon with any of these tools. —Ippopotamus (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I have now merged Icon editor with Computer icon as per the talk, thus no longer making these "Icon Editors", but "Computer icon software" instead and so both @icon sushi and IconBuilder are "Computer icon software" and will remain in the list. --Hm2k (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Now I agree. —Ippopotamus (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Shell account dispute

I can see that you ran in the silent problem and I thought it might be helpful to chip in at this point. Looking at the negative response there, I can't see much choice but to suggest the next step would be an WP:RFC. Either way, the question proposed for a 3O or RFC needs to be neutral and so seem fair to both sides. Considering the failure of the last 3O to resolve the issue, the process to be followed and the text of the question should be comfortably agreed between the active parties. It may be better to ask someone from the other side of the debate to suggest some neutral wording.—Ash (talk) 00:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I've made steps towards this. --Hm2k (talk) 08:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that the latest wording was not that clear of your intent. I think you were talking about raising a 3O though you could have meant a RFC. You could revise to say something like "I propose we raise a RFC with the following question in order to resolve the issue:" (or for a 3O if that was what you were proposing). Sorry about this, I'm not intending to monitor the page but it caught my attention.—Ash (talk) 13:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I want to resolve it. I think the idea is to attempt another 3O, this time with neutral wording, failing that, submit an RFC. Unless your advice is to go straight for an RFC? --Hm2k (talk) 13:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

As I notice that two other authors chipped in during the discussion with opinions rather than just technical clarifications, I would at this point recommend an RFC rather than a 3O; even though it is a relatively minor issue. Due to the silence you encountered before, you may have to be prepared to let it run the full 30 days to ensure everyone interested actually has time to notice the page and respond (not everyone logs in every week). If you do choose the RFC remember to phrase it as a simple support/oppose style question, these tend to avoid rambling comments.—Ash (talk) 14:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the proposal to be suitable for an RFC. I've tried to keep it simple and neutral, I trust it is suitable. I'm happy for the RFC to be open for 30 days, although obviously I'd rather it be resolved quicker. Your input has been invaluable. --Hm2k (talk) 14:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

3O FAQ

You may find Wikipedia_talk:Third_opinion#Draft_User_FAQ of interest as it follows on from your earlier comments on that talk page. Your comments as a User are welcome.—Ash (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, I will add my comments. --Hm2k (talk) 15:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

NPA

WP:NPA is a policy and it states: "Derogatory comments about another contributor may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to blocks." WP:TPO is a guideline and does not apply to removal of personal attacks. Please do not restore personal attacks again. --Tothwolf (talk) 23:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can see the comment is not classed as derogatory. Which part is derogatory? I will be reverting unless you clarify your actions. Abusing policy is unacceptable. --Hm2k (talk) 23:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is a personal attack, and it was inappropriate for you to restore it twice. Consider this a formal warning instead of me adding a template message here. --Tothwolf (talk) 00:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

There's nothing to indicates it is a personal attack. You have been warned for talk page vandalism. Don't do it again. --Hm2k (talk) 00:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

You've been warned on the talk page. Everyone has been reported to ANI. Regards, MuZemike 00:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance. --Hm2k (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)