User talk:Vaulter

Lets AGF and let bygones be bygones

While I realise that we disagree on a few issues, I still think you are a quite sensible person with whom I could positively interact. Its probably just me, but from my perspective you have kinda been following me around Wikipedia since April or earlier refuting and/or questioning my motivations on a regular basis. So while my actions may seem completely absurd to you, I am asking you here and now to please stop accusing me of dishonesty. If you knew me in RL, you would know that dishonest is absolutely the one thing I am not. If anything, I am honest to a fault, people tell me that here on Wiki, and in RL. Ideally, I would like to find a comfortable working relationship where, while we rarely even cross paths, I really do not want any kind of ongoing grudge with you. I harbour no ill will toward you and I do not take our interactions during the Beatles mediation personally, I hope you feel the same. Best! GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, the only interactions I can remember having with you outside the mediation are the recent one regarding NYB (I've taken an interest in the elections since the RFC in October) and when we both commented on a couple TFA requests (and I voted to support two of the three you supported there).

On a related note, I'm a little confused about why you told Coren you would "drop the issue" and then 6 hours later began asking others to comment on it. I also don't understand why you notified those users since only one of them was a party to the mediation. (And FYI, I intend to comment there). Hot Stop (Talk) 04:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

After looking through some contribs I did oppose your RFA too (based on interactions regarding our favorite band). It also looks like we were involved in discussions on Mitt Romney's talk page, But I was involved there four days before you Hot Stop (Talk) 04:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. I did follow-up with jc37, probably shouldn't have in hindsight. I took Coren to mean don't ask Brad anymore questions, which is a bit strange in light of the fact that he is currently a candidate for re-election, but that's another story ... GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

On a side note, I do think you've done a very good of copyeditng and getting articles up to FA status. Especially getting Imagine up in time for Saturday. Hot Stop (Talk) 04:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Hot Stop! GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:51, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• To clarify, I would have much sooner supported "The", than the "avoid-dance", and I'm being completely honest there. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 05:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Meh, I don't think 'the Beatles' should be avoided at all costs but there could be some cases where it be re-written to avoid it without hurting the prose. That being said, the article is an FA so I understand that minimization might not be possible and could seem counter intuitive at times Hot Stop (Talk) 05:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought we could agree to at least some common ground on this issue in general. If the article passes FA, then its prose is excellent and the subject doesn't necessarily need to be avoided mid-sentence just because some people are jarred by it for various reasons. I personally don't find "The Beatles" jarring at all, I just think Wikipedia should generally follow external style guides and the vast majority of high-quality sources. My main concerns with the "avoid-dance" caveat are 1) the undue restraint it puts on prose and 2) that it leaves a can-of-worms on the table for further disputes, per article, per occurance. Believe it or not, above all else I just want this lame and tedious dispute to end, long-term, big "T" little "t", either way is fine with me as long as this vague caveat isn't grounds for further dispute and edit-warring. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 07:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• What's your favourite Beatles album and why? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:36, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Abbey Road. I think they all new it would be their last recorded album and they all came together (pun intended) and put together something (ditto) they'd all be remembered for. It also, at least for me, is the one album where each member (including Ringo) really contributed in terms of writing. Hot Stop (Talk) 13:34, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

An excellent choice for excellent reasons! I agree, their songwriting was most balanced on Abbey Road, which was one of the very first albums I ever purchased. I go back and forth between AR and Pepper. Depending on the mood I'm in, either one might be my all-time Beatles fav, though Revolver is certainly no slouch either IMO. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:13, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Paul Watson

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Paul Watson. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 December 2012

• News and notes: Wobbly start to ArbCom election, but turnout beats last year's

• Featured content: Wikipedia goes to Hell

• Technology report: The new Visual Editor gets a bit more visual

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Human Rights

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 22:37, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Yield sign Straw Poll

Since you were involved in the move discussion for Yield sign, please checkout the straw poll over at Talk:Yield sign#Proposal to close discussion and share your thoughts. Thanks Tiggerjay (talk) 21:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hamas

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hamas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Am I to take it

...from your refusal to respond to my question that you are unable to formulate a reason why the article should not be in the category other than "absolutely not"? Thank you for admitting that. Buck Winston (talk) 22:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)