| Revision as of 04:22, 24 September 2009 editKikkokalabud (talk | contribs)3,706 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:58, 25 September 2009 edit undoKww (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers82,486 edits →Juanacho: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| Thanks for your help with to ''The Last Song''! I did revert to the old version though, because I think a significant new version should be discussed first. I actually organized the page in a similar way to your method with , but it was also reverted by another user. To be fair, most Featured and Good articles are organized with development under production as well, but I think there's merit to the structure you used. Lets discuss the changes on the talk page, but refrain from making them until the end of the peer review. Thanks, ] (]) 05:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)<br> | Thanks for your help with to ''The Last Song''! I did revert to the old version though, because I think a significant new version should be discussed first. I actually organized the page in a similar way to your method with , but it was also reverted by another user. To be fair, most Featured and Good articles are organized with development under production as well, but I think there's merit to the structure you used. Lets discuss the changes on the talk page, but refrain from making them until the end of the peer review. Thanks, ] (]) 05:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)<br> | ||
| P.S. Nice job on the Sucker Punch article! | P.S. Nice job on the Sucker Punch article! | ||
| == Juanacho == | |||
| First, I truly dislike Juanacho's lack of discussion. He knows that the creates controversy, and then refuses to discuss the controversy that he has created. That's a problem. I recognize that, but I don't know much that I can do about it. We could go down the ] path if you want. | |||
| That said, one of the reasons that you will have difficulty getting much done is that Juanacho's edits generally create a superior article to the one he starts with: more concise, a better sense of priority about what belongs in an encyclopedia, less redundancy, and less fan-oriented language. Most of the editors on the Disney area tend to forget that the language you use to describe someone you despise and the language you use to describe someone you adore should be identical: the feelings of the author should not be revealed in the article. | |||
| If there are particular items that he has removed that you object to, give me some details, and I'll look them over.—](]) 01:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:58, 25 September 2009
Changeling
A split is a big deal, and I ask you to start discussion at Talk:Changeling (film) before taking such a significant action. I like the Sucker Punch article waiting in your sandbox, by the way. Hope it does start filming without problem! Erik (talk | contribs) 00:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh. Sorry. It was just soooo big. And thanks. It starts filming in September 10. Kikkokalabud (talk)
- The article went through the FAC process, and none of the reviewers recommended a split as it got promoted to Featured Article status. Steve (talk · contribs) is the primary contributor of that article, and he's a reasonable person. I'm sure he can justify the length or come up with a way to summarize some sections further. Erik (talk | contribs) 00:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
The Last Song
Thanks for your help with these edits to The Last Song! I did revert to the old version though, because I think a significant new version should be discussed first. I actually organized the page in a similar way to your method with this edit, but it was also reverted by another user. To be fair, most Featured and Good articles are organized with development under production as well, but I think there's merit to the structure you used. Lets discuss the changes on the talk page, but refrain from making them until the end of the peer review. Thanks, Liquidluck (talk) 05:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Nice job on the Sucker Punch article!
Juanacho
First, I truly dislike Juanacho's lack of discussion. He knows that the creates controversy, and then refuses to discuss the controversy that he has created. That's a problem. I recognize that, but I don't know much that I can do about it. We could go down the WP:RFC/U path if you want.
That said, one of the reasons that you will have difficulty getting much done is that Juanacho's edits generally create a superior article to the one he starts with: more concise, a better sense of priority about what belongs in an encyclopedia, less redundancy, and less fan-oriented language. Most of the editors on the Disney area tend to forget that the language you use to describe someone you despise and the language you use to describe someone you adore should be identical: the feelings of the author should not be revealed in the article.
If there are particular items that he has removed that you object to, give me some details, and I'll look them over.—Kww(talk) 01:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)