This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Roger Davies (talk | contribs) at 00:28, 13 March 2015 (→DS scope: We don't usually enforce our own remedies). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:28, 13 March 2015 by Roger Davies (talk | contribs) (→DS scope: We don't usually enforce our own remedies)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
If you post a message on this page, I'll reply here to avoid fragmenting the discussion. So add it to your watchlist.
If I leave you a message on your talk page, it will be added to my watchlist. So feel free to reply to it there instead of here.
Please sign and date your message by typing four tildes (~~~~)
Well, stout yeoman, four ounces of Accuracy, if you please.
Ah! It's been on order, sir, for two weeks. Was expecting it this morning.
Vagaries aside, let's get more to the point:
Actually, first, allow me to introduce myself: Hello. I am Berke Stavoy--your #1 purveyor of tumescent orations, lengthy pontifications, errant alliterations, and dubitable informations.
Oh, and a gratingly gratuitous amount of polysyllables. Erratic eccentricities abound, of that, I assure you.
Now, let's dive in to the salient viscera of this little enjoining, shall we?
There is this 'article'--if you feel comfortable calling it that, after reading it--which, speaking as a nascent HEMA practitionar/weapon collector, offends me quite deeply.
What is this article, you ask? Peruse to your pleasure--or lack thereof:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Half-sword
Yes, yes, I could just use the brackets, but I already had it copied.
Oh, and if you were looking for a non-contrived corroboration for my self-alleged 'tumescent orations', look no further than the talk page of that aforementioned 'article'. Don't worry--that one was actually rather aberrantly poetic for me. Facetiously, of course, but nonetheless, that isn't my typical....modus operandi, I suppose.
But I digress.
Speaking as someone who has manipulated a functional longsword by utilizing various blade-hand contact techniques, this article, simply put, does not do the subject justice. Being able to grasp the blade--even with just one hand--opens up a veritable bevy of additional fighting techniques for the swordsman. And, even the opponent, if you want to discuss the counter-play facets of the subject--although, I'm fairly certain you don't.
So, in a word, 'help'. I have drawn your attention to this article so that I might enlist the help of some fellow task-force members--or, if nothing else, have them give me their advice. It doesn't have to be you, specifically--or anyone, specifically, for that matter--but even the help of one additional editor would facilitate the rectification of this malady quite estimably.
I'm not of the opinion that I'm possessed of enough editing experience to reforge this pile of pabulum into a meritorious article all on my lonesome, so any form of assistance would be very much appreciated. Thank you for your time. Ghost Lourde (talk) 02:42, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 March 2015
- Special report: An advance look at the WMF's fundraising survey
- In the media: Gamergate; a Wiki hoax; Kanye West
- Featured content: Here they come, the couple plighted –
- Op-ed: Why the Core Contest matters
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
DS scope
When an editor violates a DS sanction on WP:ARCA should I report it there or at WP:AE? NE Ent 23:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- AE is best. We don't usually enforce our own remedies, Roger Davies 00:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)