User talk:Vfrickey: Difference between revisions
ClueBot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Vfrickey/Archives/2016/October. (BOT) |
|||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Db-afc-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:1989|1989]] ([[User talk:1989|talk]]) 08:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC) |
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Db-afc-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> [[User:1989|1989]] ([[User talk:1989|talk]]) 08:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC) |
||
== the editor who "... desire to make complex psychotropic organic chemicals at home..." == |
|||
Despite not being a regular participant at the refdesk until recently, I actually remember this case (unless there was more than one, in which case I remember one of them) and I think your comparison of the recently closed thread to that was was highly apt, and a great way to end the thread. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">[[User:MjolnirPants|<font color="green">'''ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants'''</font>]] [[User_talk:MjolnirPants|<small>Tell me all about it.</small>]]</span> 20:36, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:36, 13 February 2017
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
?
about this, that was a revert of an edit to the policy, not its talk page. you probably want to self-revert that... Jytdog (talk) 19:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, and done. Also drew attention in the talk page to the issue with Aoziwe's proposed version, which makes vigilance against "laundering" of primary source material as secondary in our articles optional; if WP:INDY and WP:SECONDARY mean anything, they shouldn't be evaded if the editor doesn't feel like doing what ought to be due diligence. I see what he's saying about broad consensus, but we had that on the two guidelines I just mentioned. I don't see why enforcing them requires going to an RFC. loupgarous (talk) 19:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Vfrickey. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Vfrickey. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Kenneth Mahood
Hello, Vfrickey. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Kenneth Mahood".
In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}
or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 08:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
the editor who "... desire to make complex psychotropic organic chemicals at home..."
Despite not being a regular participant at the refdesk until recently, I actually remember this case (unless there was more than one, in which case I remember one of them) and I think your comparison of the recently closed thread to that was was highly apt, and a great way to end the thread. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:36, 13 February 2017 (UTC)