User talk:Calidum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Wikidata weekly summary #140[edit]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Age disparity in sexual relationships[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Age disparity in sexual relationships. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #141[edit]

Trainor[edit]

Not that I think you actually care, but I disagree with your reasoning at the Meghan Trainor article. The DRN really needs to be concluded first. There's been no resolution there. You can't forum shop and take the decision or consensus you like better, saying that's the decision of the community. I don't have a problem that there might be a consensus that doesn't support my viewpoint, I care that there are editors ignoring the open and in progress DRN that remains unresolved. If a DRN discussion is opened and talk page discussion goes on anyway, are we supposed to go with the one we like or the one that was opened to actually get a resolution? It seems to me that the latter is the appropriate choice. -- WV 06:41, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: You are wrong as there is no discussion supporting the vice versa. As the consensus on Trainor's talk page is the only one, it shall be followed 'til the DRN is concluded. Marano fan 06:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
From my reading of the discussion, there is currently a clear consensus on the article's talk page. Maybe that changes after the dispute resolution process takes place, but that doesn't mean there isn't consensus to call her a singer-songwriter right now. (As Winkelvi correctly noted, the discussion DRN has seemingly fallen through the cracks, for what it's worth.) And I honestly don't know what you mean by forum shopping, because the place to discuss content is the article's talk page. -- Calidum 07:53, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
What I mean is that both Lips Are Movin and MaranoFan are going from forum to forum to get answers they want which will give them permission to edit the article to suit their agenda. That, and getting editors banned, blocked, sanctioned, whatever works to keep those they don't like from editing their pet articles. Last week it was someone else, this week it's me. Both accounts are essentially SPAs -- others have also noted this. It's becoming a complex situation and both accounts (Lips and Marano) are now tag-teaming when it comes to userspace warnings and edit warring. -- WV 08:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Understood, though I really haven't paid attention to their behavior (or yours) at other articles. If you have particular concerns there are venues to have their actions evaluated. -- Calidum 08:05, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
@Winkelvi: After this, I kindly take back all my positive remarks. Marano fan 08:07, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I realize that. And have tried those venues (3RR and DRN not withstanding). But I've also tried to ignore them as much as possible because their behavior is really troll-like in nature. Personally, I think there's more to all of it under the surface - and know from experience that with these types of something's-not-quite-right situations, the real picture will emerge eventually. Right now, I'm seeking advice and help from editors I trust and am waiting to see how that pans out. Something has to stop the disruption. It's gone way beyond ridiculous. -- WV 08:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

YGM[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Calidum. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

-- WV 03:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I sent a reply your way. -- Calidum 04:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bhutanese passport[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bhutanese passport. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2015[edit]

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle[edit]

Hello, Calidum! Re: this edit, I'm not sure if you reverted by accident since you only reverted one of my edits (and with no explanation), I've undone it as there was no organization called "Negro League". Rather, it was a collection of leagues that played Negro baseball; therefore, "league" is not capitalized when referring to general leagues. See the lede of Negro league baseball for clarification. I hope this explains why I undid your reversion. Rgrds. (Dynamic IP, will change when I log off.) --64.85.216.2 (talk) 17:49, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

I had done it intentionally under the impression there was one "Negro League," but after your revert I checked it out and you were right. Sorry about that. -- Calidum 23:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #142[edit]

Please comment on Talk:Human rights in Northern Cyprus[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)