User talk:Evilphoenix/Archive 09: Difference between revisions
Daniel5127 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
m →A compromise on Ref converter: Whoops |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
No, I didn't know that there is Chinese Wikipedia. But Thank you for show me Chinese Wikipedia. Please, Do not say ''Your grammar is quite poor," that makes me more stressful. You've said many times. This would be best way to say.''Your sentence doesn't make any sense." It's ok that everyone makes mistake because they probably don't know the spelling of world even He/She knows the definition of world. Like ''Exaggeration" is ''Exageration''. That can be happened. |
No, I didn't know that there is Chinese Wikipedia. But Thank you for show me Chinese Wikipedia. Please, Do not say ''Your grammar is quite poor," that makes me more stressful. You've said many times. This would be best way to say.''Your sentence doesn't make any sense." It's ok that everyone makes mistake because they probably don't know the spelling of world even He/She knows the definition of world. Like ''Exaggeration" is ''Exageration''. That can be happened. |
||
[[User:Daniel5127|Daniel5127]], 05:20, 25 April 2006(UTC) |
[[User:Daniel5127|Daniel5127]], 05:20, 25 April 2006(UTC) |
||
== A compromise on Ref converter == |
|||
Hey, welcome back. Anyway, I've been thinking, I really can't think of a place in which {{tl|ref}}/{{tl|note}} is better than Cite.php, but I am willing to concede that in some technical articles Harvard referencing may be preferred because it allows functionality that, at least for now, Cite.php doesn't. I'm thinking of adding some sort of strong warning message to Ref converter if it detects someone trying to convert Harvard references. I'm just wondering what you thought of this proposed modification. |
|||
Also, you should check out [[Talk:J. K. Rowling]], there is a straw poll you will be interested in. --[[User:Cyde|<font color="#0055aa"><span style="cursor: w-resize">'''Cyde Weys'''</span></font>]] 20:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:30, 25 April 2006
Archive 01: May 2005 - August 2005
Archive 02: May 2005 - October 2005
Archive 03: October 2005 (much busier as an admin, I guess)
Archive 04: October 2005 - November 2005
Archive 05: Nov 28th, 2005 - December 19th, 2005
Archive 06:December 19th, 2005 - March 8th, 2006. Includes wiki-break and combined refactoring from various discussions I removed while I wasn't archiving anything.
Archive 07: March 2006 - April 16th, 2006.
Archive 08: April 17th, 2006 - April 24th, 2006.
RfC made live
I made your draft RfC live. I have invited comment to several editors, so do not wish to have the page blanked. But I can understand if you do not want it live on your own user space. I believe that Cyde has acted with sufficient ongoing intransigent that this will need to be "run up the ladder", unfortunately... and moreover, the RfC has two certifiers already, even without yours (though I welcome your additions or certification, of course). Thanks, Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Ahh.
No, I didn't know that there is Chinese Wikipedia. But Thank you for show me Chinese Wikipedia. Please, Do not say Your grammar is quite poor," that makes me more stressful. You've said many times. This would be best way to say.Your sentence doesn't make any sense." It's ok that everyone makes mistake because they probably don't know the spelling of world even He/She knows the definition of world. Like Exaggeration" is Exageration. That can be happened. Daniel5127, 05:20, 25 April 2006(UTC)
A compromise on Ref converter
Hey, welcome back. Anyway, I've been thinking, I really can't think of a place in which {{ref}}/{{note}} is better than Cite.php, but I am willing to concede that in some technical articles Harvard referencing may be preferred because it allows functionality that, at least for now, Cite.php doesn't. I'm thinking of adding some sort of strong warning message to Ref converter if it detects someone trying to convert Harvard references. I'm just wondering what you thought of this proposed modification.
Also, you should check out Talk:J. K. Rowling, there is a straw poll you will be interested in. --Cyde Weys 20:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)