| Revision as of 10:42, 4 August 2012 editIndiacheer (talk | contribs)7 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:43, 4 August 2012 edit undoIndiacheer (talk | contribs)7 edits ←Replaced content with ''''Archives''': Archive 1 == Our mutual friend == ==A sammie for you== http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_religious_populatio...'Next edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| == Templates == | == Templates == | ||
| I need job otherwise i will spoil complete wiki and other webapps..... | |||
| ] | |||
| I am not web engineer... | |||
| I've noticed there's a dispute going on between ] and you on ], which is on my watchlist. Personally, I support your reversion because I'm against adding pictures in navboxes, especially without discussion or consensus. It clutters up the template and is unnecessary for navigation. But I'm wondering if you can clue me in on the dispute? I've noticed similar edits by the IP on other templates.--''']''' ] 07:06, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :So V you're against pics in templates? Just when I was becoming fond of you. Have you tried a pic in a template? Once you start, you can't stop, hahahaha! If you haven't noticed, I put pics everywhere... – ] <sup>(])</sup> 07:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Amusing but it depends to me honestly. Steve Jobs template is pretty small and the focus at least to me should be on the categories within. Whereas Barack Obama (his picture is too huge in it and holy crap so many articles), George W. Bush, etc have pictures mostly because the picture isn't distracting away from the content and they're quite notable. I'm not saying Steve Jobs isn't notable but honestly I don't know what though. Maybe it has to do with my mood? ] (]) 07:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the quick response! If the user isn't responding, then that's problematic. The consensus is that, as per ], editors must explain their edits, especially if disputed or controversial. I'd recommend bringing the issue to the attention of administrators and editors. I would advise against following another user's edits. It's against ], and policy warns against it. If the user is unresponsive and disruptive, discuss him directly on the noticeboards. Have you tried ] yet? --''']''' ] 07:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well, I'm aware that it isn't polite to follow him around since it's a form of hounding. I've found a lot of questionable edits by him which I've had to revert although I'm sure other users would have reverted his actions anyways. I've added a lot of pages to my watch list so sometimes I see him once in a while and I dig through his contribution history which a lot were just bad. I honestly didn't think to discuss him at ANI because I don't really have a good reason to make a report at least in my opinion. Most of his contributions centers around categorizing so it's hard to suggest users to submit an explanation on that basis in the edit summaries. However he has the habit of modifying or submitting political templates such as Nazism which did not help. He would also modify templates such as the Libertarian template to add people who didn't contribute to the theory. ] (]) 07:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::If the user is persistently unresponsive, while continuing to make controversial edits, concern likely is warranted. I hope you manage to find a way to resolve the issue. Cheers, and good luck!--''']''' ] 07:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{WikiProject Conservatism invite|Signature=– ] <sup>(])</sup> 07:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)}} | |||
Revision as of 10:43, 4 August 2012
Archives: Archive 1
Our mutual friend
A sammie for you
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_religious_populations
Heh
Question about edit
Not everyone...
Bold edit!
Templates
I need job otherwise i will spoil complete wiki and other webapps..... I am not web engineer...