| Revision as of 17:31, 14 June 2018 editHarshrathod50 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,060 edits →The Nun: Replied.Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:35, 14 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,311,938 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Joeyconnick/Archive 9) (bot | ||
| (853 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| | algo = old(30d) | | algo = old(30d) | ||
| | archive = User talk:Joeyconnick/Archive %(counter)d | | archive = User talk:Joeyconnick/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| | counter = |
| counter = 9 | ||
| | maxarchivesize = |
| maxarchivesize = 50K | ||
| | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | ||
| | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| {{Archives}} | {{Archives}} | ||
| == About Twink Article == | |||
| __TOC__ | |||
| Okay, I get that you've hijacked the 'Twink' article and don't consider my edits welcome. F*ck it, I don't care! ] (]) 03:51, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Hello brother == | |||
| ⚫ | == FYI == | ||
| hey why did u revert my edit ? Megalyn Echikunwoke's bio states that her father is Igbo Nigerian and her mother is Irish and German, according to this information neither of her parents are "African American" by definition I put her as a nigerian actresses and u removed it, please explain why? when it clearly states she's ethnically Nigerian through her father <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:37, 19 May 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ] <span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:-15deg;color:darkblue">''']'''</span><span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:15deg;color:darkblue">]</span> 04:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Katherine Langford== | |||
| Wanted to give you a heads up - I posted on ]'s talk page to discuss why you removed the infobox image. Thanks! ]<sup>(])</sup> 01:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == December 2024 == | |||
| == Requests for feedback on Metro Vancouver transit and related pages == | |||
| ] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]  according to the reverts you have made on ]. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to ] with others, to avoid editing ], and to ], rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. | |||
| Hey {{u|Joeyconnick}}, | |||
| Points to note: | |||
| If you ever need feedback from me regarding changes to Metro Vancouver transit and related pages, don't hesitate to ping me (either on the relevant talk page or my user talk page). Even though I haven't been as active lately, I'm always willing to contribute feedback and assist with edits. ] (]) 04:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| # '''Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;''' | |||
| :Hi {{u|Sweetnhappy}}... thanks for the offer! I think that can sometimes be seen as ], though, so I often prefer to put out general calls for any interested parties' opinions. You and I have often agreed in the past so I didn't want it to seem like I was calling in people just to back up my opinion on something this major, hence the more general call. But where possible and appropriate, I'll keep you in mind to notify directly for sure. It's always good to have people who are dedicated enough not just to do edits but also to write up their opinions, even if they don't always align with mine. —] (]) 06:57, 28 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| # '''Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.''' | |||
| If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's ] to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases, it may be appropriate to ]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be ] from editing.''' <!-- Template:uw-ew --> ] (]) 06:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Which part of "Lawrence further said her pictures had been intended for Hoult during their relationship, and that unlike other victims of the incident, she did not plan to sue Apple Inc." was hard to comprehend? ] (]) 06:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Works vs. publishers == | |||
| ⚫ | ==The Babysitter== | ||
| The "work" field automatically italicizes the name of the site, but "publisher" does not. I was trying to get the citation to line up with how these site names are formatted in their own articles. --] ] 03:48, 31 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| Why does it matter though? Plot summaries usually refer to the characters by their full names when first introduced. It doesn't get in the way and doesn't disrupt the flow of the article either.] (]) 19:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == The King (2019 film) == | |||
| It has been confirmed by multiple sources the film is due to be released in 2019.<br> | |||
| https://variety.com/2018/film/news/robert-pattinson-more-cast-join-david-michods-king-for-netflix-1202826471/ | |||
| <br>https://screenrant.com/netflix-king-movie-cast-timothee-chalamet/ | |||
| <br>https://www.popbuzz.com/tv-film/netflix/timothee-chalamet-robert-pattinson-the-king/ | |||
| <br>http://collider.com/netflix-the-king-timothee-chalamet/ | |||
| <br>http://www.vulture.com/2018/05/robert-pattinson-timothee-chalamet-ben-mendelsohn-netflix-casting.html | |||
| <br>http://ew.com/movies/2018/05/31/robert-pattinson-timothee-chalamet-the-king-netflix-henry-v-film/ | |||
| <br>https://www.cnet.com/news/netflix-gets-shakespearian-with-timothee-chalamet/ | |||
| <br>https://i-d.vice.com/en_us/article/3k4vew/this-new-netflix-film-stars-our-two-faves-timothee-chalamet-and-lily-rose-depp | |||
| <br>] (]) 01:28, 3 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :{{re|ElizaOscar}} Okay... so someone should cite one or more of those sources in the ] and ] articles before they consider listing the film as happening in 2019. But I understand why it's been moved to "(upcoming film)"—it doesn't have a solid release date... and even those can change considerably cf. ]. But at least ''The New Mutants'' has a ''specific'' release date, even though it may be subject to change. So I think "TBA" is appropriate for now, given ]. —] (]) 03:11, 3 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ==Italics proposal we talked about== | |||
| Sorry for the delay. Busy few days, plus I procrastinated, honestly. How about we put something like this at ]. | |||
| ::Two editors, myself and ], have been discussing whether Biography.com should be italicized in footnotes. Our deduction is that it is an online biographical encyclopedia. The MOS states, "Online encyclopedias and dictionaries should also be italicized (''Scholarpedia'' or ''Merriam-Webster Online''). As neither of these examples are given as "Scholarpedia.org" or "M-W.com", we're thinking that for consistency that this cite read: work=''Biography'' | publisher= ] / ])", the publisher part being as we already have it consistently now. This would make cites Biography.com consistent and agree with MOS. Thoughts? | |||
| Any tweaks or edits you'd suggest? --] (]) 18:35, 9 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :No worries re: busy (or procrastinating). Only tweak is that can we just list A&E Networks? I'm not clear on all the complexities of ownership but it seems like A&E owns/runs FYI too, correct? And if FYI is a channel which is also owned by A&E, then it probably doesn't need to be listed as the publisher also (if we are considering publishers to be the corporate "parents" as it were). If that's not sufficient, I would recommend we pick one or the other. But at the end of the day, I think the biggest plus/point is Biography is functioning as an encyclopedia/dictionary and ought to be italicized and also not listed as its domain name. :) | |||
| :Thanks for writing this up! —] (]) 21:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == |
||
| The Toronto Star calls him James Egan here, in their headline: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/06/13/i-am-a-homosexual-gay-rights-pioneer-james-egan-celebrated-in-first-lgbtq2-heritage-minute.html <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :{{re|Ffolkways}} right... and that's one source. —] (]) 23:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ==The |
||
| It is always someone who got an itch on every tiny things. My arguments: | |||
| # {{tl|ubl}} is a derivative of {{tl|plainlist}}. | |||
| # It is concise. | |||
| # It uses less code. | |||
| # Reduces page processing bandwidth because there is no line break for each entry. | |||
| # Produces same effect as plainlist template. ]] 07:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{re|Harshrathod50}} | |||
| ::(5) is irrelevant because we both already know they produce the same output. That's actually an argument against changing it (unless you are arguing that change for the sake of change is a worthy goal). | |||
| ::(1) is irrelevant because the provenance of the template doesn't affect whether to use it or not. | |||
| ::(2) to (4) are irrelevant because wikicode itself is less concise than many other things we could use to generate pages; that's to say, brevity is not the goal... accessibility to many (i.e. ease of reading/use) is. And in fact some of the examples given in the {{tl|ubl}} documentation have it being used with linebreaks, I assume for the sake of readability. I would love to see where it says that linebreaks have any kind of significant impact on processing. | |||
| ::Then there's the fact that the justification you mention in your edit summaries, the documentation at ], mentions {{tl|plainlist}} multiple times. It also mentions {{tl|ubl}}, too, but it doesn't require (or forbid) either one. | |||
| ::On top of all that, ] (] was already using {{tl|plainlist}}) and your switch to ubl from plainlist, by your own admission, didn't change how the page is rendered. So you haven't shown convincingly that ubl trumps plainlist. —] (]) 16:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Joeyconnick}} Hmmm... you took your time and came up with quit so many accusations, but I bet that you didn't even once try loading the pages in both the cases and notice the change. I know statusquo, other editors use it to defend their personal preferences just like this case. Now I can't do anything further, every effort was a waste. Just be like this, you are doing awesome job! ]] 17:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:35, 14 January 2025
 Archives | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
About Twink Article
Okay, I get that you've hijacked the 'Twink' article and don't consider my edits welcome. F*ck it, I don't care! Jaffley (talk) 03:51, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
FYI
User talk:Aoidh#Block evasion Moxy🍁 04:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
December 2024
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jennifer Lawrence. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Which part of "Lawrence further said her pictures had been intended for Hoult during their relationship, and that unlike other victims of the incident, she did not plan to sue Apple Inc." was hard to comprehend? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
The Babysitter
Why does it matter though? Plot summaries usually refer to the characters by their full names when first introduced. It doesn't get in the way and doesn't disrupt the flow of the article either.Futuremoviewriter (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)