User talk:Ɱ: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Ɱ/Archive 4) (bot |
R.SawyerIII (talk | contribs) →Hello : ): new section |
||
Line 102: | Line 102: | ||
Yes, merge is different to AfD, but the merge option was thoroughly discussed at AfD, and the consensus was to keep the article rather than merge it. [[User:StAnselm|<b>St</b>]][[Special:Contributions/StAnselm|Anselm]] ([[User talk:StAnselm|talk]]) 21:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC) |
Yes, merge is different to AfD, but the merge option was thoroughly discussed at AfD, and the consensus was to keep the article rather than merge it. [[User:StAnselm|<b>St</b>]][[Special:Contributions/StAnselm|Anselm]] ([[User talk:StAnselm|talk]]) 21:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
:It was hardly discussed, but regardless, it's the wrong forum to decide whether to merge or not, and therefore the merge proposal is still entirely valid.--[[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><font color="darkgreen">'''ɱ'''</font></span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|<font color="darkgreen">(talk</font>]] · [[User:Ɱ/Briarcliff Manor|<font color="darkgreen">vbm)</font>]] 21:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC) |
:It was hardly discussed, but regardless, it's the wrong forum to decide whether to merge or not, and therefore the merge proposal is still entirely valid.--[[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><font color="darkgreen">'''ɱ'''</font></span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|<font color="darkgreen">(talk</font>]] · [[User:Ɱ/Briarcliff Manor|<font color="darkgreen">vbm)</font>]] 21:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Hello : ) == |
|||
Thanks for your message. I am not the most skilled wikipedia contributor so I definitely benefited from your work related to Briarcliff Manor. . . it is very well done! |
|||
I will certainly "hit you up" with any questions or issues that might require guidance. Any suggestions you may have are welcome as well. Thanks again. --[[User:R.SawyerIII|R.SawyerIII]] ([[User talk:R.SawyerIII|talk]]) 15:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:33, 14 February 2015
Please click here to leave me a new message.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
This talk page is automatically archived. Any threads with no replies in 10 days may be automatically moved.
Archived discussions |
---|
Archive 1: October 2011 – January 2014 Archive 2: February 2014 – August 2014 |
Messages:
6 November 2024 |
|
2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment
We named that article with the month because there is still the possibility that someone will write an article about the July 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment, the one that was just the freight train but happened at nearly the same location. I can understand creating the redirect, but try not to use the non-month name for that accident in article text. Thanks. Daniel Case (talk) 03:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- I figured there was probably some reason, thanks for the explanation.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:57, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Briarcliff College
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Briarcliff College you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cd5464 -- Cd5464 (talk) 18:20, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Briarcliff College
The article Briarcliff College you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Briarcliff College for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cd5464 -- Cd5464 (talk) 18:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Briarcliff Farms, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Briarcliff College
The article Briarcliff College you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Briarcliff College for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cd5464 -- Cd5464 (talk) 10:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Briarcliff Farms
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Briarcliff Farms you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 04:41, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Briarcliff Manor Public Library
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Briarcliff Manor Public Library you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Briarcliff Manor Public Library
The article Briarcliff Manor Public Library you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Briarcliff Manor Public Library for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 21:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
It looks like a modified version of the draft was implemented? I don't plan to get involved, but just wanted to know if it should still be in the queue as an administrative issue or if the request edit should be closed out. A lot of people respond to request edits but don't update the template. CorporateM (Talk) 03:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- CorporateM: I don't think it was finished; I'll get back to this/you/the other parties soon and resolve all of it; I've been terribly busy. Thanks.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 05:16, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, no need to involve me. I also do paid editing, so I try to avoid request edits from other independent paid editors. My inquiry is purely administrative. CorporateM (Talk) 14:43, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, merge is different to AfD, but the merge option was thoroughly discussed at AfD, and the consensus was to keep the article rather than merge it. StAnselm (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- It was hardly discussed, but regardless, it's the wrong forum to decide whether to merge or not, and therefore the merge proposal is still entirely valid.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello : )
Thanks for your message. I am not the most skilled wikipedia contributor so I definitely benefited from your work related to Briarcliff Manor. . . it is very well done! I will certainly "hit you up" with any questions or issues that might require guidance. Any suggestions you may have are welcome as well. Thanks again. --R.SawyerIII (talk) 15:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)