User talk:Timrollpickering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
User:Timrollpickering
Main user page | Talkpage | Talkpage Archive miscellaneous | Talkpage Archive 1 | Talkpage Archive 2 | Talkpage Archive 3 | Talkpage Archive 4 | Talkpage Archive 5 | Talkpage Archive 6 | Talkpage Archive 7 | Talkpage Archive 8 | Talkpage Archive 9 | Talkpage Archive 10 | Talkpage Archive 11 | Talkpage Archive 12 | Talkpage Archive 13 | Talkpage Archive 14 | Talkpage Archive 15 | Talkpage Archive 16 | Talkpage Archive 17 | Talkpage Archive 18 | To Do list | Gallery | With thanks to...
Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1
  2. Archive 2
  3. Archive 3
  4. Archive 4
  5. Archive 5
  6. Archive 6
  7. Archive 7
  8. Archive 8
  9. Archive 9
  10. Archive 10
  11. Archive 11
  12. Archive 12
  13. Archive 13
  14. Archive 14
  15. Archive 15
  16. Archive 16
  17. Archive 17
  18. Archive 18

Welcome to my talk page.

Please note that I prefer to have substantial discussions about individual articles on their own talk pages rather than here, so that all editors of those articles can see them and contribute.

Please also note that I prefer conversations to be in one place. I will reply to comments where they are left and, if necessary, transfer comments back to the original talk page where the conversation was initiated.

To leave a new message click here.

WikiProject Elections and Referendums article tagging[edit]

Hi Tim. Sorry to have to post directly on your talk page, but you may have noticed (on the WP:Elections and referendums talk page) that I am trying to get all the election and referendum articles tagged for the project. Unfortunately this is not making any progress, as people are claiming there is no consensus to do this, as no-one has responded on the Project talk page. Could you possibly comment on the proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#Bot to tag articles for the WikiProject, as I'm getting rather frustrated by the attitude of the people at WP:BTR. Cheers, Number 57 12:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Category: Woden/Wōden[edit]

Hi, I have undeleted Category:Woden and turned it into a redirect to Category:Wōden, which is what the filer actually requested (and is possible for people to type into the search box). I've also created Category:Odin as a redirect while I was at it, since that is a very likely search target. I'm not sure Wōden is the correct place for this category - if we're going to have an overarching category with a macron, it should logically be the reconstructed Wōdanaz rather than the Anglo-Saxon Wōden - and as such I wish I had seen the proposal, but I think what I've done at least fixes the search problem. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Yngvadottir: And I have fixed both pages. On categories the normal redirecting doesn't work, and instead the {{Category redirect}} template should be used. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 07:47, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, thank you :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 11:49, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:Antisemitism (again)[edit]

Hey Tim! We really must stop meeting link this :) I'm not sure how long you've been with the project or how long you've been concerned with "ethno-religious topics" for lack of a better term but it was decided 6 or 7 years ago that Semites, and anti-Semites, and antisemitism, and antisemites, would be completely different things, well, sort of. (Palestinians are Semites, blah blah blah). As such I've reverted your edit[1] as there didn't seem to be any such "speedy" discussion. I hope I didn't screw up, but, either way, that ship has long since sailed. -- Kendrick7talk 07:28, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

A speedy rename doesn't need discussion, just a notice with a valid reason and no objections. There was a move discussion on the main article which changed it to Anti-Semitism and the category is following accordingly. It was proposed and not opposed on the speedy rename page for 48 hours and then moved for processing but for some technical reason the rename bot took 12 hours to get round to doing it. Timrollpickering (talk) 07:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, OK, I didn't notice the main article had been renamed. I supported the hyphenated version back in the day, so I have no complaint. -- Kendrick7talk 01:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Move review for Anti-Semitism:Requested move[edit]

Hi, I have asked for a move review, see Wikipedia:Move review#Anti-Semitism, pertaining to Anti-Semitism#Requested move. Because you were/are involved in the discussion/s for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page/topic, you might want to participate in the move review. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:14, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Rule on RM moratorium[edit]

Talk:Love Eterne (film): I created another discussion a few hours after the previous one was closed, is this allowed? Please advise. Timmyshin (talk) 23:59, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

There isn't currently a hard and fast rule but it depends on a mixture of the options on the table, the users involved and the level of discussion. Sometimes a discussion brings up an alternate title that's best considered in its own right and so a follow-on RM is useful and accepted as a way forward. But that's very different from immediately launching a new RM on exactly the same options as the earlier one, and starting it both times, because the previous didn't go the way you wanted. Timrollpickering (talk) 07:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your reply. So if I start an RM to a different title it would be OK right? Timmyshin (talk) 19:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Depends very much on the individual circumstances and what came up in the discussion. If there was overwhelming support for the current title then an alternative is unlikely to go anywhere. If there was heavy dissatisfaction with the current one but dislike for the alternative a more focused discussion may help. But in general wait a while and discuss it informally rather than launching new RMs immediately after the old have closed. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2014 (UTC)