| Revision as of 17:32, 2 June 2015 view sourceBozzio (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,293 edits →June 2015: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:35, 2 June 2015 view source Bozzio (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,293 edits →June 2015: enjoy your blockNext edit → | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
| '''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ]] 17:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC) | '''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ]] 17:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ==Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion== | |||
| ] | |||
| Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at ] regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on ]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you. ]] 17:35, 2 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:35, 2 June 2015
 | Editing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled. See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account. |
| This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |  2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 |
Leah Song
Hi, are you sure it is appropriate to make an article with the stage name as title and make the real name a redirect to that article, instead of the other way around? So you have actually an article about a name and not a person, but the article contains all the information about the person. Sounds wrong to me. Wouldn't it be better to use 'Leah Smith' as title? When I created the article about Raising Appalachia I was thinking hard and long if there is enough info about the sisters (especially Leah, as she sings also solo) outside of the Raising Appalachia group for an individual article. Unfortunately I didn't think so and there is little new info apart from the Raising Appalachia connection.
I also have to ask you, where you see the advantage of linking inline references first to an extra Note section and than from there to the Reference section (using sfn) instead if directly from the inline ref numbers to the references (using ref)??? Seems to me this wastes space on the page and makes it more complicated for readers to get to a reference. Isn't the sfn template mainly useful if one reference is used several times in an article (I might be wrong as I didn't know that template before and just quickly read it's description)? Optimale 08:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, in this case, per WP:COMMONNAME. She actually goes by Leah Song in general, and the majority of articles about and I think all the interviews, the bio on her own site and pretty much everything refers to her as Song rather than Smith. Of course, with a last name like Smith it's hard to do a valid comparison using Google search. Skyerise (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- As for the citation style, the creator of the article gets to determine it (see WP:CITEVAR). I find that it is much, much easier to build an article from scratch using Harvard-style referencing. Sorry if it's not what you prefer. Skyerise (talk) 14:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Sylvan Grove Theater and Columns
Two images added; there are a bunch more in a Commons category, which I've linked via a template. - Jmabel | Talk 21:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, Joe! Skyerise (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Ada Lovelace archives
Hey Skyerise, I recently set up archiving for Talk:Ada Lovelace, but I didn't realize that using the monthly archiving system was going to create such a mess (lots of tiny archive pages instead of a few large archive pages). I was hoping to redo it with a simple sequential archive and then delete the monthly archives. What do you think? Kaldari (talk) 21:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Also, is there any particular reason you aren't an administrator? Seems like you should be :) Kaldari (talk) 21:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- I think monthly is fine. They are searchable, right? So people can find what they are looking for regardless of the structure. It doesn't look like you are an admin on EN so it creates a lot of deletion work. If I'm mistaken and you can do the deletions yourself, then I guess go ahead, but I don't see the problem....
- As for reason I am not an admin? I have received a lot of harassment from IP editors. I mean a lot. Don't really want to have a higher profile as it attracts more attention and I'd probably get in trouble for just stomping any such IP harassers with tools rather than following process. Have no patience for them and think we shouldn't even allow IP editing. Skyerise (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- That's sad to hear, but not surprising. If you experience more harassment, you may want to consider emailing someone on Misplaced Pages:Admins willing to make difficult blocks. If you don't know anyone on that list, I recommend User:FloNight. She's super helpful. Cheers! Kaldari (talk) 02:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, yeah, sometimes I do paid editing. Despite the fact that I am legit about creating cited, non-promotional articles, I don't expect I would be successful at an admin bid because of it, even if I wanted to be an admin. Skyerise (talk) 21:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
RIPM
Hello! A couple of weeks ago, you should have received an email from me with a link to a form to complete to receive access to RIPM. If you did not receive the email, please let me know. Otherwise, please complete this form as soon as possible so we can process your request. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, I did get the email. I'l complete the form tomorrow. Things suddenly got very busy and I wasn't able to attend to it, but they have calmed down... Skyerise (talk) 01:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Unwelcome use of talk page
The editor Sundayclose (talk · contribs) is not welcome to post on my talk page. Other editors feel free to revert any further harassment. Skyerise (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
- Roger! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
- Just an FYI: one can not ban another from posting appropriate warnings and notices. See WP:NOBAN Cheers Ping me with {{u|Jim1138}} and sign "~~~~" or message me on my talk page. 02:58, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- Read more closely: one cannot ban an administrator from posting notices. Non-admin editors have no special privileges when it comes to canned notices, especially when they are using them to harass rather than to inform. See also WP:DTTR. Skyerise (talk) 15:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- Just an FYI: one can not ban another from posting appropriate warnings and notices. See WP:NOBAN Cheers Ping me with {{u|Jim1138}} and sign "~~~~" or message me on my talk page. 02:58, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
June 2015
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ¡Bozzio! 17:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you. ¡Bozzio! 17:35, 2 June 2015 (UTC)