User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2016/September
 | 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. |
The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hair cell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Afferent. 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) 09:33, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
- Software package metrics
- added links pointing to Software package and Afferent
- Barbershop Harmony Society
- added a link pointing to Sault Ste. Marie
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to a discussion at MOS talkpage.
Hi, Dog,
I merged part of WP:BANDNAME into MOS:THECAPS in an attempt to make things less confusing, only to have it rudely undone without any explanation by Prickzi, I have asked him or her to please, then, discuss the reversion on the talk page, which he/she has so far refused to do. Will you please enter your opinion on if we should leave the merger in place or why not to have it in place, here: [1]? Nancy Pantzy (talk) 01:18, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Not actual MOS changes, but....
Here's my reply to your having said the following:
"You sort of stumbled into a hornet's nest. Many details of the MOS, policies, and guidelines have been contentious for a long time. As a consequence, the normal application of wp:BRD in article space tends not to be the best choice for these areas. It's best to discuss it diplomatically or grow a very thick skin when working on these. However, until you've been around WP for a while, you might want to hold off and see the way things work. LeadSongDog come howl! 15:33, 20 September 2016 (UTC)"
- Okay, well, I wasn't actually making changes to the MOS, but trying to include something from a section of the MOS that isn't part of the main article into the main article, just to avoid confusion between the two parts. Isn't doing the discussion on the talk page there what IS discussing it diplomatically? If you don't think it is, then will you please describe what you think is, instead?
- What about deciding whose edit, between one that reduces confusion and one that reverses the article to a point that puts the confusion back, should prevail, then?
- Holding off seems to do nothing, which is why I tried to spark discussion by others there, because even the guy who did the reversion is refusing to discuss his own edits with people, which is passively hypocritical. So which condition do you prefer? Which consensus would you join? If I revert Prickzi's edit so that MOS:THECAPS again includes what's in WP:BANDNAME, will you help form the consensus that agrees that the content should stay included? Nancy Pantzy (talk) 00:14, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Nancy Pantzy:No, revert wars are never helpful. Simply discuss the edit (not the editors) on the talkpage. Since you are effectively discussing a page merge there are tags to draw editors attention to that discussion. See wp:MERGE for more on that. Given that MOS:CAPS is already a confusing mess, I suspect consensus will go against such a merger. As I said though, creating policies and guidelines is not really something new editors can productively engage in until they come to know the way they are applied in practice. It's better to direct your attention elsewhere for a few thousand edits first. LeadSongDog come howl! 15:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thread carpal tunnel release, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cut. 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) 11:28, 22 September 2016 (UTC)