User talk:Koavf/Archive040
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
User talk:Koavf archives
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hitchens/Packer interview on Orwell
Hi - I was working on some of my C-SPAN lists, and I came across this interview, which I just watched for the first time. You may have encountered it already, but if not you might want to; I bet you would find it interesting. KConWiki (talk) 02:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks I know that BBC are having a month of Orwell, but I didn't know that us colonists were joining in, too! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
List of 2012 Tamil soundtracks
Please consider the article List of 2012 Tamil soundtracks. I mentioned my comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of 2012 Tamil soundtracks. Thanks. --Inbamkumar86 (talk) 11:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Category:Military aircraft of World War II
Category:Military aircraft of World War II, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Interview today
Justin,
This is Jeremy Foote - the researcher from Purdue. I'm hoping to confirm that we are still good to go for an interview this afternoon. Please forgive me if this isn't the correct place to hold this discussion. -- Jdfoote (talk) 16:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
La Güera photo correct license
Hello Koavf, how are you doing? I write this lines because I have some problems with this photo. I had to upload it with a generic attribution license (CC BY 2.5) intead of a Spanish attribution license (CC BY 2.5 ES), because when I tried to put the latter, it appears as if that type of license doesnt exists. Could you give some help? Thanks and regards, --HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Fotolar Is the origin of the photograph from the Fotolar blog? If so, it can be uploaded to Commons... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Atom Heart Mother. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.
- If you are engaged in an article dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's
- Chronologies Per WP:ALBUM, album chronologies are supposed to go in one unbroken chain for an artist--that is the consensus. Pink Floyd aren't somehow exempt. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- The first link states "Exceptions may be appropriate for artists with very complex discographies which may warrant more than one chain." The second is a project page and doesn't appear to contain anything to support your views. Please could you create a thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pink Floyd so this discussion may have a wider audience, thanks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:34, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Exceptions How/why does this warrant an exception? This isn't (e.g.) the Grateful Dead who have over a hundred albums all with byzantine release histories. If you want a lot of feedback, don't post to that narrow project talk, but a larger one like WT:ALBUM. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- If you know the correct procedure to get a wider consensus, you should point editors to the specific discussions, not blind revert. Let's work together, not at loggerheads, thanks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Consensus There is a consensus. Two users can decide anything at a project talk page--how/why would that be a trump card against several users over the course of years contributing to a much broader project? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- You seem to very keen on loudly asserting a consensus - now can you point me to specific discussions so I may read and evaluate them, thanks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Chronologies consensus Search. E.g. 1, 2, etc. And the template documentation was changed to reflect this. Again, you've ignored my straight-forward question about why Pink Floyd would be exempt and I notice that you've also chosen to not chastize Parrot of Doom for doing the same (and worse) than me, so it seems difficult to me to believe that you're really interested in my perspective as much as you are interested in bickering with me. Can you please explain why Pink Floyd is a musical act that would be exempt from the plain language of Template:Infobox Album? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Chronologies consensus Search. E.g. 1, 2, etc. And the template documentation was changed to reflect this. Again, you've ignored my straight-forward question about why Pink Floyd would be exempt and I notice that you've also chosen to not chastize Parrot of Doom for doing the same (and worse) than me, so it seems difficult to me to believe that you're really interested in my perspective as much as you are interested in bickering with me. Can you please explain why Pink Floyd is a musical act that would be exempt from the plain language of
- You seem to very keen on loudly asserting a consensus - now can you point me to specific discussions so I may read and evaluate them, thanks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Consensus There is a consensus. Two users can decide anything at a project talk page--how/why would that be a trump card against several users over the course of years contributing to a much broader project? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- If you know the correct procedure to get a wider consensus, you should point editors to the specific discussions, not blind revert. Let's work together, not at loggerheads, thanks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Exceptions How/why does this warrant an exception? This isn't (e.g.) the Grateful Dead who have over a hundred albums all with byzantine release histories. If you want a lot of feedback, don't post to that narrow project talk, but a larger one like
- The first link states "Exceptions may be appropriate for artists with very complex discographies which may warrant more than one chain." The second is a project page and doesn't appear to contain anything to support your views. Please could you create a thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pink Floyd so this discussion may have a wider audience, thanks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:34, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
It will take some time to read through those discussions, but just to clarify, my disappointment over your activities is with you edit warring with poor edit summaries, nothing more, nothing less. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Edit warring Which is fair, but the point that I made previously is that you are selective in your disappointment and I would like to know why. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's not important anymore. The edit warring has stopped and we've moved onto (hopefully fruitful) discussions. To be precise, I'm not fussed one way or the other on this, just as long as we discuss first, then edit. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Ah So it was important at some point? This is one of the things that's truly maddening about trying to work here: when I am expected to justify my behavior to the nth degree, even if it's applying a very simple and altogether non-controversial standard to a handful of articles, while other users flat-out refuse to answer simple questions directed to them. I would believe your argument if you had more (apparent) equanimity. Something along the lines of "Justin, you shouldn't do that, and Parrot, you shouldn't either". (I say "apparent" as it's possible that you've chided Parrot off-wiki, but it frankly seems unlikely.) Instead, I just get someone demanding things of me and not being charitable enough to provide the same in return. I imagine that my questions directed to Parrot will fall on similarly deaf ears while I waste my time acquiescing to what both of you ask of me. This is more-or-less what I come to expect with every dispute here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you feel that way. All I can suggest, and it works well for me, is that I try not to spend too much time on here and go out walking, roadtripping or spending time with my family. Give that a go and hopefully you'll see things in a calmer atmosphere. Be cool. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sure It's hard to argue with that advice. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you feel that way. All I can suggest, and it works well for me, is that I try not to spend too much time on here and go out walking, roadtripping or spending time with my family. Give that a go and hopefully you'll see things in a calmer atmosphere. Be cool. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Ah So it was important at some point? This is one of the things that's truly maddening about trying to work here: when I am expected to justify my behavior to the nth degree, even if it's applying a very simple and altogether non-controversial standard to a handful of articles, while other users flat-out refuse to answer simple questions directed to them. I would believe your argument if you had more (apparent) equanimity. Something along the lines of "Justin, you shouldn't do that, and Parrot, you shouldn't either". (I say "apparent" as it's possible that you've chided Parrot off-wiki, but it frankly seems unlikely.) Instead, I just get someone demanding things of me and not being charitable enough to provide the same in return. I imagine that my questions directed to Parrot will fall on similarly deaf ears while I waste my time acquiescing to what both of you ask of me. This is more-or-less what I come to expect with every dispute here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's not important anymore. The edit warring has stopped and we've moved onto (hopefully fruitful) discussions. To be precise, I'm not fussed one way or the other on this, just as long as we discuss first, then edit. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
RE: Discussion
No problem. Could you do the same at
Ethereal wave categories
you replaced my category with one with "wave" capitalised. music genres aren't capitalised Lachlan Foley (talk) 22:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Actually You replaced my category, which is against process. Just ask for the main article to be moved, then the categories can be renamed easily. Doing it out of process is probably a bad idea. As far as the renaming goes, it probably won't pass though, since New Wave music is capitalized. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:41, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
ANI notice
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Appalling POV merging by Emmette Hernandez Coleman of Flag of WS/Flag of the SADR. Thank you. —Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
8th anniversary
Don't forget to award yourself the Master Editor III service award on your 8th anniversary . (Seems to me it should be Vanguard Editor instead, but what do I know.) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 18:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- Actually I edited anonymously before I had a login, so I'm a little further along than that... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Collaboration on audio and subtitles - late reply
Hi. I personally appreciate your offer of collaboration between usability, accessibility, and volunteers working on subtitles and such. Good idea and approach. I wish I had the time to get engaged in this project. It may not happen soon, but I believe there is bound to be a time where people will collaborate on subtitles in the way you offered. Cheers, Dodoïste (talk) 14:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks It seems like an obvious blind spot to me, but I've moved on to other things now myself. Let me know if you find the time. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Cleanup
Hello, Koavf.
You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. |
---|
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Kudos NayanAmbali (talk) 04:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC) |
Tagging articles
I've seen how you are active at tagging articles with WikiProject templates. I was wondering if you would be similarly interested in doing the same for WikiProject Pakistan as there are an awful lot of Pakistan-related articles, categories and templates that need tagging. You're help would be appreciated in that regard. But I similarly understand if you are not interested at this point in time or are too busy. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 06:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
- No problem I'd be happy to help--I'll do some right now. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 16:31, 4 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thanks for taking the time to chat with me, Justin! I appreciate you going out of your way to help me and give me advice about project page creation and everything else. You rock. Oline73 (talk) 17:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC) |
Kalahari Surfers
I disagree with you on the categorisation question. I decided mainly on the basis of Ghits and no objection at talk to merge the two articles which previously existed and consolidate a decentish article at Warrick Sony. But the bulk of his work has gone out under the Kalahari Surfers moniker so that is the proper title for the cat, imho. I do agree with the two article renames you did; would you consider in future changing links to the new title if you make a page move like that? Cheers, --John (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Since you took part in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 7#Present status categories for persons
I have nominated Category:Current national leaders for undeletion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 6#Category:Current national leaders you may be interested in taking part. Ryan Vesey 23:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Removal of {{duration}}
I removed it because it is a blatantly pointless template that should be deleted already. It takes less effort to simply type in the duration, and templates have also been known to slow down pages more than plain text. I am nominating it for deletion. Lachlan Foley (talk) 00:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Photo consensus discussion
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Green (R.E.M. album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The One I Love (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
The article F.C. Indiana has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: