Talk:Me

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

pp-semi-protection

Plain and simple: People have been vandalizing this article way too much.Fanficgurl 8:12 2 November (UTC)

I've already requested semiprotection months ago, but the admins were not interested. Guido den Broeder (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me is

me can be defind as you ur mum or any large person/living organism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.153.73.52 (talk) 04:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me is the opposite of you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.3.26 (talk) 00:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC) .hi[reply]

ME

{{editprotected}} add this entry:

ME or Montreal Exchange

76.66.195.63 (talk) 09:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done —EncMstr (talk) 17:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me means yourself it does not mean anyone else apart from you.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis

I have removed both edits, and here are my reasons:

Consensus has repeatedly been demonstrated on talk:chronic fatigue syndrome and talk:myalgic encephalomyelitis when it existed that both terms for ME (encephalomyelitis and encephalopathy) are considered interchangeable with CFS and CFS is the term of greatest service to readers as it is most prominent. I consider this completely and utterly finished, and invite anyone who contests it to review the two talk pages in question to see if consensus has not been adequately served. The mainstream medical community considers the two terms interchangeable, use them so, and are sufficiently uncertain about the condition that they have avoided choosing a new name until there is certainty. It is undue weight to give ME a separate article or a separate link on this page. That brings me to my second point, the manual of style for disambiguation pages states that there should be one link per line, unpiped in most circumstances; it should go directly to the link. Myalgic encephalomyelitis does not exist as a separate page, it is a redirect for the CFS page; that alone means it should not be linked. It would also add a second link to the bullet, again out of keeping with the DAB MOS. It is is POV-pushing to include both links or to indicate that there is any merit to the ME page being a separate article. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 14:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silly me, I assumed ME was a page. Apologies. Why didn't I use popups? Verbal chat 14:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not, after extensive (exhaustive really) discussion (here is the latest, here is another, here is a third, here is a fourth). I don't know why you didn't use popups, and my only possible explanations involve questioning your parenthood. Popups rule, BOW BEFORE POPUPS!!!!!!1!!11!1! Even were it to be a separate page, there should still be only one link per line; that there's no separate page means that it's an unlinked initial statement followed by a linked qualifier. DAB pages are a pain in the ass to format and I always question a lot of the nuances. This, however, isn't a nuance.

Did I mention you should have used popups?

WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 15:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]