Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:55, 7 December 2014

Template:Expiry

Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 1 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

SimilarWeb improvements

Hello, please let me know why did you put the tags again? I made changes according to your requirements. Is there anything else I can do to bring the page in accordance with the Misplaced Pages requirements, so that you could remove the tags?

Thanks Cohentom (talk) 13:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Cohentom:, the article is currently completely based on primary sources (like crunchbase, alexa and venturedeal) or unreliable promotion-disguised-as-news sites like smartinsights, 3scale and startupcamel.com.

The text of the article reads as a press-release. What's the point of that "Technology" section?

You're free to promote your projects around the Web, but Misplaced Pages is not the place to do that. --damiens.rf 16:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

RE: reverting Jason Narvy

Hey, instead of taking the easy way out and reverting my edit, why don't you contribute to the community by Googling around and citing a source yourself, you laggard ineffectual douchebag? Here, I'll make your job even easier and paste the source right here: http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/ http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/ http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/ http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/ http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/ http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/ http://cuchicago.edu/faculty/communications-and-theatre/jason-narvy/

Re:hanging editor's comment

What the heck, when you are right, you are right. Tony the Marine (talk)

Re: Notability of Fatimah Busu

Thank you for your interest in the article on Fatimah Busu. By re-reverting you are engaging in an edit war, and could be temporarily blocked from editing by continuing to do so.

An article's talk page is the appropriate place to air concerns about the article. This article meets the basic notability guidelines as well as additional ones for authors and academics — there are two major references, independently published by academic publishers. She is the most prominent author in the Malay language, and I shall add that cited information to the lead of the article for clarity. Please, in future, engage in conversation with other users instead of reverting their work. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 16:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

@Garzo:, I guess you were the one to revert the tag-addition (while failing to address the problems raised by the tag). Please, consider removing the tag only when you add to the lead of the article that the she is "the most prominent author in the Malay language". But please, use reliable references or you'll be reverted. That's a BLP and you don't have a choice.--damiens.rf 17:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

The tag was reverted because the author is notable and the article meets those guidelines. Re-reverting is engaging in an edit war, and is not acceptable. I have added another major source to the article, and filled out the lead paragraph. If you feel there are further problems, you should use the article's talk page to air them. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 17:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Top Banana

You stop reverting it. And it's not "your work", wikipedia is a community collaboration. You just want to get into an edit war.Top Banana the group is more notable than the guesthouse listed there and which you do not mind having. Antonio Camilo Martin (dime aca) 05;42, August 14, 2014 (UTC)

Asimov short story "Reason" Revertion, Why?

Hello there. I'm new to Misplaced Pages, but feel the Article could be improved by providing some ideas regarding interpretation. can you please explain why you reverted my contribution. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maninspired (talk • contribs)

@Maninspired:, please just read Misplaced Pages:No original research. --damiens.rf 19:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

RE: Reverting List of Puerto Rican slang words and phrases

I'm trying to say this in the nicest way possible. However, the article already has way more than three words referenced, however, why do you only allow three of these to pass by, huh? Liston, the article already states so at the top of it having multiple issues, if you know how to read, douchebag. So just let it be, as there's already a statement claiming it having multiple issues at the top than just leaving the damn article close to being scarce of three referenced words of crap, thanks to you. So please just stop angering everyone, including me, and contribute your positiveness on Misplaced Pages and stop vandalizing every article that you can by being a references police, if you kindly could now? Marioluigi98 (talk) 17:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)