Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ikjbagl (talk | contribs) at 15:20, 25 June 2020 (→Edit warring: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

Welcome to my talk page!

Your GA nomination of Arc Héré

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Arc Héré you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yakikaki -- Yakikaki (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Arc Héré

The article Arc Héré you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Arc Héré for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yakikaki -- Yakikaki (talk) 15:01, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring

You are also guilty of edit warring, so leaving a warning on my page is a tad hypocritical. WP:OWN is also a policy, and one you show signs of with this article. This was utterly inappropriate, as were your reverts on the article last night. When edits are being made in line with accepted policies and guidelines, you should not remove them back to your preferred version, particularly when the original version is poorly done. - SchroCat (talk) 06:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

That edit was not inappropriate. Fixing grammar and adding back specificity because I watch a page I created does not mean I "own" the page (I am well aware of the OWN policy). I was unaware of some of the MOS rules like punctuation being outside quote marks (considered incorrect in my profession), which is why I said on your talk page that the BRD policy exists for a reason--a brief discussion on the talk page could have informed me of rules like that without you starting an edit war. Ikjbagl (talk) 14:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, there's no reason for your rudeness. "Poorly done" and "second rate" are clear insults when we both know I wrote the source material. I can see why people have questioned your civility; you appear to be quite bellicose. Ikjbagl (talk) 14:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it was inappropriate. There is not one shred of justification in undoing the edits that were done to the page and making it worse as a result. Why breach guidelines like ENGVAR? Did you think that two editors and a bot were deliberately making it worse? And to use an untruthful edit summary as justification is even worse. (And punctuation being inside or outside quote marks is nothing to do with a profession, it's stylistic or geographically-based).

I use the term "second rate" to refer to the article, not the individual and, as it is applied to an inanimate object that, you say, you don't own, it is amiss to say that it is an insult. If I had referred to the people who wrote it, you may have a point, but as I wasn't referring to any individual, the attempted slur is laughable. There is no need for you to personalise the disagreeent by name-calling. If you wish me to revert in kind, I will do, but there is little point in me lowering myself to the level you have already gone to.

It takes two to edit war, and you were equally culpable. You could or should also have gone to the talk page to discuss, particularly when I was giving you an indication of the sections of the MoS that were applicable. I have no idea why you thought it appropriate to edit war when being informed of the sections of the MoS that were applicable. – SchroCat (talk) 15:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not going to argue with you. Stop commenting on my talk page. Ikjbagl (talk) 15:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)