User talk:Piranha249/Archives/2018/October
Appearance
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Piranha249. 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 Signpost: 1 October 2018
- From the editor: Is this the new normal?
- News and notes: European copyright law moves forward
- In the media: Knowledge under fire
- Discussion report: Interface Admin policy proposal, part 2
- Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbcom
- Technology report: Paying attention to your mobile
- Gallery: A pat on the back
- Recent research: How talk page use has changed since 2005; censorship shocks lead to centralization; is vandalism caused by workplace boredom?
- Humour: Signpost Crossword Puzzle
- Essay: Expressing thanks
You reverted Senate of Canada with the edit summary "Still think this version is better at providing an understanding of the Canadian Senate". The edit summary is too vague per WP:SUMMARYNO especially considering 15 edits are being reverted to a five-week old version. Those edits contained edit summaries such as
- Senators: copyedit, rm WP:OR per banner
- Chamber and symbols: WP:EASTER, copyedit, WP:NOT#DICTIONARY, rm WP:OR
- Senators: Fixed formatting issue
- clean up refs, remove some WP:REFBLOAT, much more work needed, many out-of-date refs in the article, etc.
- convert bibliography to proper ref
- Entitlements: add ref'd info
Effectively you are throwing away all of the above because you "think this version is better". If your intention is to improve the article, please redo those edits. --Cornellier (talk) 17:11, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
2018 World Series
Any reason why you moved this back to draftspace? It's clearly ready to go, in my opinion. SportingFlyer talk 23:02, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- SportingFlyer It was never approved to be moved by the draft approvers, and you had said that as much. –Piranha249 23:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Piranha249: I'd approve it now, but my "approve" button is missing for some reason. Any chance you could revert the move? My frustration in the move discussion was that the move request was the improper way of getting it into mainspace, not that it wasn't ready to go. SportingFlyer talk 23:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- OK, I'll go ahead. –Piranha249 23:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! SportingFlyer talk 23:20, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- OK, I'll go ahead. –Piranha249 23:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Piranha249: I'd approve it now, but my "approve" button is missing for some reason. Any chance you could revert the move? My frustration in the move discussion was that the move request was the improper way of getting it into mainspace, not that it wasn't ready to go. SportingFlyer talk 23:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 October 2018
- From the editors: The Signpost is still afloat, just barely
- News and notes: WMF gets a million bucks
- In the media: Bans, celebs, and bias
- Discussion report: Mediation Committee and proposed deletion reform
- Traffic report: Unsurprisingly, sport leads the field – or the ring
- Technology report: Bots galore!
- Special report: NPP needs you
- Special report 2: Now Wikidata is six
- In focus: Alexa
- Gallery: Out of this world!
- Recent research: Wikimedia Commons worth $28.9 billion
- Humour: Talk page humour
- Opinion: Strickland incident
- From the archives: The Gardner Interview