| Revision as of 00:51, 7 March 2014 editLesser Cartographies (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,573 edits →Harp Twins: 4th draft (the /nice/ one....)← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:14, 7 March 2014 edit undoDemiurge1000 (talk | contribs)26,944 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLoveNext edit → | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
| ::::] (]) 00:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC) | ::::] (]) 00:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For your efforts in assessing a question at the Teahouse based on the merits of the topic... a good assessment and very valuable. Your feedback makes a difference. --] (]) 01:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
Revision as of 01:14, 7 March 2014
|
| This is Lesser Cartographies's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 14 days  |
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
A page you started (The News Letter of the LXIVmos) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating The News Letter of the LXIVmos, Lesser Cartographies!
Misplaced Pages editor Slashme just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Fascinating article!
To reply, leave a comment on Slashme's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Harp Twins
BG White has repeatedly violated an understanding that you have helped broker. Instead of edit warring both myself and Dontreader were to discuss any changes to the Camille and Kennerly Kitt page with yourself and changes would be made by you. The agreement did not include Dontreader whining to BG White and BG White kowtowing to his every whim. BG White has been repeatedly introducing linkspam into said page. attempt to raise the issue with BG White was met by silence. duffbeerforme (talk) 05:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- Insulting someone usually leads to silence. Agreement was to not to edit the page and instead to discuss on my or Lesser's talk page. You already said you don't have to abide by that. Dontreader has been coming to both Lesser and me as per the agreement. He has not edited the page. I've have told Dontreader no and yes to things he has proposed. Links in question are sourcing that there was an album released and when it was released. This is permitted and unfortunately, Amazon iTunes seems to be the ones people choose. This is why I added it. I already asked if you had a better link and so far have been ignored.
- Remember, I issued you both warnings not to edit war over the Kitt page. I warned the next time I would block both of you. So far you have thrown the agreement out, not civilly discussed, reverted and thrown insults at every change.
- Lesser has been on a Wikibreak for a bit. When he returns, if he want to decide to remove, keep or change links, that is fine by me. Bgwhite (talk) 06:38, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- Duff, Bg: I'll take a look. Unlikely I'll decide anything for a least a day, probably two. Probably best to leave things alone until then. I'll be in touch. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 17:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hello Lesser Cartographies. This is a Featured Article, and it has several iTunes and Amazon links in the Release history section to support content. Please notify Duff about this. Unless he is willing to wage war (successfully) to remove "shop" links from every Featured and Good article on Misplaced Pages, there is absolutely no justification for him to insist on removing the CDBaby links from the Kitt page. Have a nice day... Dontreader (talk) 05:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Don: As to the Madonna article, this site is a far more reliable (and complete) source than amazon. As to justification for removing certain commercial links, I can think of several, but WP:LINKSTOAVOID is sufficient ("Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services"). Here's a better argument: if the information you're trying to cite can only be found on pages selling the product, that information probably doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article.
- Duff: I don't want to work with someone who yells "hypocrite" at the first (or second, or fifth) sign of a misunderstanding. Not only was that uncivil, it was counterproductive: you've removed any incentive for Bgw to come around to your point of view, and you've made me very reluctant to agree with you and be seen as rewarding your behavior. Your actions are making it more difficult for me to remove links that we both agree shouldn't be there. Please don't do that again.
- Bgw: Thanks for stepping in during my absence. That was the right thing to do. Thanks for the "remove, keep or change links", and I'm happy to reciprocate. I think you've proposed the best solution: replace those links with better ones. Until I can find something better, I don't see any harm in leaving the article as-is.
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| For your efforts in assessing a question at the Teahouse based on the merits of the topic... a good assessment and very valuable. Your feedback makes a difference. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC) |