User talk:SilkTork

I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.
— Barack Obama

Welcome!!! Pull up a chair, let's have a nice chat. I'm glad you called. I'll put the kettle on.
SilkTork

La Stazione reply

Hi, I think I answered your questions at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/La Stazione/archive1#SilkTork. If you feel that your issues have been resolved, please indicate an unambiguous support. I'm sorry if this comes off as curt, but the nomination has been open for two months and I believe that if the reviewers don't specify their level of support, it may be archived at this point. --Gyrobo (talk) 00:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If there is ongoing discussion and article development then a FAC generally stays open as far as I'm aware, but I'm not a FAC regular. I did not intend to either support or oppose - I was on the FAC page for another reason and the depot discussion caught my eye. Since commenting on that particular FAC some aspects of the article have caught my attention. I don't think it is FA quality at the moment, and to be honest, I would ask for more development if I was doing the GA review. I suggest a little more research and development, building up the lead per WP:Lead and some copyediting would improve the article. Good luck with getting to FA. SilkTork *^YES! 22:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some points

I was incensed because I made a philosophical argument and two others immediately jumped to declare it invalid. As to "make sure", there are many ways to achieve this. I will argue that this !vote of a couple dozen of editors in an obscure forum can not change how this cite works. So, there is no consensus. Establishing it will require a discussion comparable to that of flagged revisions. I struck the last clause in my comment that was not helpful. Ruslik_Zero 07:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tree shaping

SilkTork, as you will see, Blackash continues to exert a strong opinion on the talk page on issues with a strong commercial and personal COI. I think it is essential for Blackash to be banned from the Tree shaping talk page so that editors with no commercial interest or personal involvement can discuss the issues of article name and current practitioners without continual interference.

This argument has gone on for years now. Several editors who came long ago in response to an RfC in this subject have been unable to make any progress because of continual interference from COI editors. Slowart obviously also has a COI but at least seems willing to withdraw from certain discussions if Blackash does the same. Something needs to be done. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did consider suggesting that the topic ban should include discussion of the topic anywhere on or linked to Wikipedia as I felt that the matter would not die simply with a ban on directly editing the article. I'll take a look. SilkTork *^YES! 10:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incubation project

I see from the discussion at the Incubation project that you are interested in that project. You might be interested in Wikipedia_talk:Article_Incubator#Use_of_incubation_outside_stated_guidelines. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I have commented. I note that the project page was suggesting that people delete pages out of process - a similar mistake that the Incubate project made. It's useful that people are paying attention! Well done. SilkTork *^YES! 00:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

page problem - Generation Y

I believe there are attacks on a talk page and should be removed. The thread has become not relevant to the article. The user accuses me of vandalism from editors. I removed my comments from the talk page and replies I believed were attacks. The other user agree the thread is off topic yet it is still on the page. I am hoping you could look at this and see what to do. Thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Generation_Y#Off_topic

75.148.160.76 (talk)

I've removed the thread. I've taken a look at the article and it appears to be developing appropriately. I did a little research on Gen Y and what I read matched what was being said in the article. There appears to be some disagreement among sources regarding the starting birth date of Gen Y people, and that is reflected in the article. I hope the matter is now resolved. If not, please let me know. SilkTork *^YES! 15:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. 75.148.160.76 (talk)