This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RiseRobotRise (talk | contribs) at 08:19, 6 January 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 08:19, 6 January 2007 by RiseRobotRise (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| Notices |
|---|
| Yes, I am an administrator. |
| If you wish to discuss the content of an article, please do so on that article's own talk page. That's one of the things that they are there for. |
| I dislike disjointed conversations, where one has to switch between pages as each participant writes. |
| For past discussions on this page, see the archive. |
hi! Blueaster 05:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The User:Carlpeterson spammage
Thanks for putting an end to that mess! Could you close the pending AfD on one of them? DMacks 19:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- I was right in the middle of doing exactly that. Uncle G 19:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! DMacks 20:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your edit to User talk:Navou
I do appreciate your comments and hope that you will allow me to explain my reasoning. My recommendation was just that, only a recommendation. My recommendation clearly did not reach consensus, so no harm done, right? I stated what "appeared" to be an applicable principle and asked if this could be included into another project instead. I might change my recommendation to keep after seeing some debate, and seeing that I might be wrong about the guiding policy, or about the article.
The nominator stated "I humbly ask that the nomination just be ended now." so I closed the AFD as nom withdrawn and keep. I was the only dissent, and I withdrew my recommendation.
Also your text on my talk page appears a little presumptuous and cross, as I did put a little thought into 'What can I do to improve this article" I came up with nothing. Forgive me if I am mis-interpreting your comment. I am very familiar with the process and policy.
You are however correct about one thing, I did not look at the articles age. I'm human. Please in the future help me to improve rather than use comments like "You clearly did not..." Instead "Did you look for sources or try to expand..." might have come across better. You and I have a common goal, we both want to see Misplaced Pages succeed. I hold this project in high esteem, as I am sure you do. Just word your stuff different, if possible. ;P Navou 23:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Bum Fuck, Egypt
Counting Google hits is not research. One has to actually read the things that the search locates.
- And what indication do you have that I didn't? The last listed item should have been a tiny hint. Or is the above your "Google hits" macro that you click on automatically every time you read the word "Google"? --Calton | Talk 02:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have the very words that you wrote as an indication: "21 hits in Google Books" "24 in Google Blogs". You're counting hits right there, without a mention of what those hits actually are. Uncle G 11:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Svenska in other languages
In Misplaced Pages:Notability, if you look at the "in other languages" bar, you'll see about 6 links to the sweedish language page that links you here, it began with your edit, I don't know how it got in there, and I don't see any visible code in the source that links to that page. What shall we do? I already made a comment on it on the notability talk page. Thanks RiseRobotRise 08:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)