User talk:TheGracefulSlick

Hello, welcome to my talk page brothers and sisters, please comment below if you want to discuss anything!

Zachary Taylor: I have requested feedback

TheGracefulSlick recently accepted an edit to remove two sentences from Zachary Taylor. There is a section on that article's talk page where I requested feedback on the potential of that edit to be WP:GOOD. Please address the issue in section "168 years" before reverting the edit again, thanks. - Sleyece 17:43:02, July 3, 2017 (UTC)

The Good Article Nominations Page Needs Your Help!

Good Articles: Music needs the help of willing reviewers!

Hi there. You nominated an article for evaluation against the good article criteria some time ago, but I noticed you have yet to review an article yourself. Although it's not mandatory, it would be helpful if every user who creates a nomination also reviewed at least one other article, as this would help clear the massive backlog. Reviewing someone else's article can also help you in the long run: every article reviewed brings yours one position closer to the top of the nominations list! If you worked on the article you nominated, chances are you're already familiar with the six good article criteria. It really isn't hard to review, and may take an experienced editor only a few hours to complete. If you have the time and would like to help, please click here, take a moment to figure out which article you'd like to review, then click on its (start review) button. Thank you for reading, and if you need assistance with your review at any point, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page and I'll respond to you as soon as I can. Homeostasis07 (talk)

Marseille stabbing

Hi the article should be delete. Have you got an opinion ? --Panam2014 (talk) 16:30, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Limey and their albums

The AfD has been closed before I could make this comment, but just to let you know... I went to the British Library today and had a good look through Music Week, NME and Sounds from the mid-70s... I found out that the Silver Eagle album you originally put up for AfD was released in February 1977, but I couldn't find a single thing regarding the band during the time periods that I believe the two albums were released – no articles, no interviews, no album reviews, not even an ad in any of the magazines promoting their releases... no wonder the band never troubled the nation's consciousness with such a poor advertising campaign by RCA. If the band itself ever comes up for AfD again the focus will have to be on verifying the sources that duffbeerforme came up with, because it doesn't look like the music press of the time will provide us with anything. Without doubt the albums fail notability, seeing as there appear to be no reviews at all of either of them. Richard3120 (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi

I understand that you are a deletionist with a grudge. But stay off my talk page. --BabbaQ (talk) 18:16, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

BabbaQ I understand you are an inclusionist without a clue. But stay off my talk page. If you are not here with civil intentions or with a drive to improve your behavior, you are sadly not welcome. I hope you can turn that around soon.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Bad edit

This edit made impossible to revert an earlier edit where the genre was "fixed". Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:57, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Missing people

I got into a spot of bother recently re: publicising AfDs of missing people articles. The argument was that there is no project and thus such nominations can fall under the radar. For that reason, I mentioned my latest nomination at Talk:List of people who disappeared mysteriously, which is a central point of some merit for those that have an interest in such articles. Of course, it has meant that I'm "losing" the argument at the AfD but it is a practice that you might consider if you nominate any more such things yourself, as I see you have done in the last weekk. - Sitush (talk) 14:30, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sitush, apologies for the belated response. I will absolutely mention any nominations related to missing persons to that page but I think I will hold off on any new nominations for the time being. I am afraid I have not made a new friend and should let them have time to cool off. Just curious, do you have this list watchlisted or do you specialize in missing persons articles? In the short time I have interacted with you at AFD, I find your responses thoughtful, even if it you were in the minority, and would certainly encourage your regular involvement in crime-related AFDs in general.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 03:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Why I hatted the discussion

I follow 2017 on my watchlist. I saw a provocative edit summary and investigated the edit associated with the edit summary. When I looked at it, the first thing I saw was one editor accusing another editor of lying (on TRM's page, you said he was "well composed". Far from it if you asked me). And another editor being hideously sarcastic. The discussion needed to stop. It was going nowhere and, had it continued, it would have resulted in a lot of vitriol from TRM and Jim without changing anyone's mind.

I am not going to respond to criticisms about my behavior on TRM's talk page. If you want to discuss my behavior, that discussion belongs on your talk page or on my talk page. pbp 01:52, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Purplebackpack89 you mean this??? "Provocative"; good grief, that's all it takes? Let me ask you this: if Jim Michael "assured you" that your friends "would mark you out as unusual, unwanted and unpopular" for having an intellectual conversation about a recent tragic event, and you know for a fact that is not true, what would you call it? An untruth? Obviously, TRM was offended by the fallacious insight into his social life by someone I presume he has never met (nor would he ever want to), and let him know it was a lie. Want to send a warning about civility or appropriate talk page behavior? Send it to Jim for that distasteful remark, not the person who stood up for themselves.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:09, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

If you believe Jim deserves a TP warning, be my guest. I'm not defending what he does. Heck, I'd probably support you if you started a discussion to T-Ban Jim. The nice thing about the hatting remedy is that it prevents either side from escalating. Additional discussion between TRM and Jim is clearly not going to change either's mind. As for how I'd word it, I might have left out the "Another lie" fragment at the beginning. Or maybe I'd have just ignored Jim.

I'll admit that my original wording of the hat might not have been the best. Maybe even warning him on his talk page wasn't the best (though that was your idea). But I stand 110% behind the idea that the discussion was unproductive and needed to be stopped. That is irrespective of blame for how it got there.

pbp 02:15, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Purplebackpack89 yet you never condemned Jim's behavior. I'm sorry but I call a spade a spade, and I call what I saw as an opportunity to remind TRM of his restriction just to watch how he would react. Caveat emptor with you: you are seeking out drama with TRM and I do not approve. This isn't even the first time you two had issues, and I can recall your proposals at Arthur Rubin's arbcom case that were contrary to the evidence provided just to drag TRM through the mud. Please let go of whatever grudge you have with him. He isn't going anywhere.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, you saw what you want to see. Whatever. It's not what actually happened and you're going out of your way to defend an editor who can't get along with anyone and will eventually have to be indeffed, but whatever. pbp 03:14, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, this has been unpleasant. He gets along with me just fine. And I do recall a stream of support when he returned from his block. I'll always defend a fellow editor who works in the encyclopedia's best interests. And like I said, TRM isn't going anywhere. Goodbye.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 03:29, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:47, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Your highhanded closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/June 2017 Brussels attack

GracefulSlick, I advise you to revert you sudde, ul=nilateral closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/June 2017 Brussels attack. I know that your started the AfD. Certainly you are free to reverse your opinon, However, once you have started an AfD my understanding is that you are not permitted to arbitrarily close it. And, in this case, because it looks as though you closed it because it was not going your way, I urge you to rethink.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:58, 6 November 2017 (UTC)