User talk:Wtshymanski: Difference between revisions
Patrick Gill (talk | contribs) Thanks for the help! |
Wtshymanski (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
How many people have to tell you before you admit that you have a problem? Is deleting material that should be [[WP:PRESERVE|preserved]] and being [[WP:CIVIL|rude and sarcastic]] really that important to you? Do you really want your legacy to be "pissed off a bunch of people, got banned from editing Wikipedia for life, watched as his former victims crawled through his edit history undeleting everything he deleted"? --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 15:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC) |
How many people have to tell you before you admit that you have a problem? Is deleting material that should be [[WP:PRESERVE|preserved]] and being [[WP:CIVIL|rude and sarcastic]] really that important to you? Do you really want your legacy to be "pissed off a bunch of people, got banned from editing Wikipedia for life, watched as his former victims crawled through his edit history undeleting everything he deleted"? --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 15:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC) |
||
: I don't trust you. This makes meaningful discussion difficult (see [[Cold War]]). Your professed concern for my legacy is doubtless some strategey of yours which I am too thick to figure out. I've learned that making complex hypothetical mental models of the behavior of other people rarely give me any meaningful insight into their next actions and is never worth the effort. To "edit" is also sometimes to delete. --[[User:Wtshymanski|Wtshymanski]] ([[User talk:Wtshymanski#top|talk]]) 16:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Thanks for the tip! == |
== Thanks for the tip! == |
||
Revision as of 16:19, 15 May 2012
This page has been blanked. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC) ..again.
Peerages
Per MOS:HONORIFIC and WP:NCPEER, it is common practice to use official styling in the infoboxes for nobility and peers. --Tærkast (Discuss) 20:40, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- Combine the Wikipedia manual of style and a peerage system and you're bound to get absurdities. Surelyl WP:COMMONNAME trumps? It's not as if Bennett inherited the title or passed it on and he only held his "peerage" for a couple of years. Finally, given the reputation of Canadians who acquired peerages, surely if someone was collecting viscounts they'd be as well served with a redirect to R.B. Bennett? --Wtshymanski (talk) 23:04, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Could we just stop for a moment and have a serious conversation? No sarcasm, no blanking your userpage as soon as you see that I tried to reason with you, just a calm, rational discussion. Why don't you try discussion just once to see if it works?
How many people have to tell you before you admit that you have a problem? Is deleting material that should be preserved and being rude and sarcastic really that important to you? Do you really want your legacy to be "pissed off a bunch of people, got banned from editing Wikipedia for life, watched as his former victims crawled through his edit history undeleting everything he deleted"? --Guy Macon (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't trust you. This makes meaningful discussion difficult (see Cold War). Your professed concern for my legacy is doubtless some strategey of yours which I am too thick to figure out. I've learned that making complex hypothetical mental models of the behavior of other people rarely give me any meaningful insight into their next actions and is never worth the effort. To "edit" is also sometimes to delete. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip!
Dear Wtshymanski, thanks for the tip about adding pages to your watchlist. I can't believe it was that simple. Best regards, Patrick Gill (talk) 16:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC).