User talk:Mysidia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives /Archive/1 /Archive/2

---

Thanx for putting the corrct stub just now -- Anon

Contents 1 Website pix 2 Geo-stubs 3 Need help with article 4 Greetings, near-namesake 5 Dean Cox 6 1WW Refactor

[edit] Website pix

Had a computer glitch, hit the wrong key, don't know what happened. Hope this has'nt inconvienced anyone. I apologise for any inconviences this may have caused. - Question was:

Can you transfer a pix of Glenn Spencer's website to the article "Glenn Spencer's American Patrol Report" ? AS you had stated, this site advocates the removal of illegal aliens, NOT legal aliens. This is to familiarize anyone visiting it.66.112.107.8 01:28, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Just letting you that the designation:66.112.107.8 is terminated, and ignore the request to place a pix of Glenn's website on the aforementioned article. The glitches started up as I was getting rid of my "Borg"-like designation. I hope this has'nt caused any inconviences. If you see my old designation on the "active duty" status,i.e. someone using it, consider it suspect. My HP made terminal was acting up. You guessed it, I was a "military brat".Martial Law 05:19, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Geo-stubs

Hi Mysidia - I've just changed the stub templates on a lot of geo-stubs you did... almost everyu country now has its own stub category (like Ireland-geo-stub, India-geo-stub, Turkey-geo-stub... it'd save a little effort if you could add the country name to any geo-stubs you do... please? Grutness...wha? 00:58, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

• Hmm.. i'll try, but it's not always so straightforward.. I couldn't find a {{South-Africa-geo-stub}}.. right now the most immediate challenge I was taking on was to figure out which articles not marked stub at all should be marked as some kind of stub -- it's kind of a delay to try and figure out what the stub type is each time. --Mysidia (talk) 19:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Need help with article

Need help with a article. It is called:"Fictional Resistance Movement/Fictional Resistance Groups". It is about FICTIONAL resistance fighters. Any suggestions ?Martial Law 06:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

• I'm afraid I don't know much about the subject of Fictional resistance fighters. What sort of help/suggestions would you be looking for. --Mysidia (talk) 00:52, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Greetings, near-namesake

I've occasionally noticed your edits in RC and thought they were mine. Because we have such similar usernames I decided to say hi. So, hi. –Mysid 12:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dean Cox

Hi, noticed your edit on Dean Cox. It must be noted that {{aflbio-stub}} should be used, not {{sportbio-stub}}, as you suggest. It is a wellknown part of WikiProject AFL guidelines. Rogerthat 02:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1WW Refactor

Please see Refactor and New discussion.

You were gracious enough to comment on 1WW; as you may know there are now seven competing proposals. On April 6 I suggested that I be permitted to refactor the proposal page into a single, unified proposal. It's my belief that most of us are tending toward the same or a similar restriction on wheel warring. I think it's unwieldy, though, as it stands. A fair number of editors have commented on these distinct versions but (precisely because they are so similar) no single one has gained undisputed consensus. I suggest that a single, improved version may fare better on its way to policy.

Just as I proposed the refactor, an editor brought to our attention yet another competing proposal, which I merged into the others, using the same format. Still another proposal has since been added, bringing the total to 7. The two new proposals are encountering an indifferent reception but they, too, have some merit.

At the time I suggested refactor, I also put myself forward as the editor to write the initial draft, based on the plurality of support for "my" version. Since the two new proposals have been added, this plurality has held.

I don't for a moment feel that this gives me any special right to dictate terms; rather I hope to draft a proposal uniting the best features of existing proposals. Unlike any of the seven currently competing versions, this refactor will be open to editing immediately by any editor. I will ask editors to refrain from supporting or opposing the new draft for the time being; instead, to edit the proposal to reflect their specific concerns. I believe the true consensus policy will then emerge, in true wiki fashion. After all, we're not so far apart.

I come to your talk page today to ask for your comment on this refactor. Clearly this will be a major change to the proposal page and I don't feel comfortable being quite that bold without some expression of interest in the idea. Once the new draft is in place, I hope also for your participation to polish it into a true expression of our values. Let's move forward with this complement to WP:3RR. John Reid 04:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)