User talk:Drmargi
| This is Drmargi's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 7 days  |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Talkback #3
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Cookies, thank you!
 Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page, or eat these cookies on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch plate}}. |
The Last Cyberman
Hi. I reverted your edit. I don't want an edit war occurring, so please hear me out. I know the source provided isn't the BBC, but it is an interview with the writer of the episode, Gaiman. Therefore it can be considered reliable because it's "from the horse's mouth", so to say. For another episode, that writen by Thompson for Series 7 part 2, the source given is also an interview with the author. 101090ABC (talk) 19:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- Doesn't matter. The BBC has to confirm the date, per consensus among the editors of the article. Den of Geeks is a fan page, and not considered a reliable source. You should know that the next step was not to revert me (please self-revert), but rather to discuss on the article talk page. --Drmargi (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- Even if the information is in an interview with the writer? I'll revert, but I'm starting to think Wikipedia has gone too bureaucratical. 101090ABC (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- The issue is the site where the interview is reported. I'd open a discussion and see if the gang is willing to go along with the edit. --Drmargi (talk) 20:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- I understand the issues with DoG, but it is a news article referring to (and linking to) an interview with Gaiman. I tried posting the original interview first, but for some reason it didn't work, so I had to rely on DoG. Anyway, I have started a discussion on the talk page. 101090ABC (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- The answer may be to link to the original news source. Until you mentioned it just now, it sounded to me as though the interview was with the site. We'll continue on the article page. --Drmargi (talk) 20:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- I understand the issues with DoG, but it is a news article referring to (and linking to) an interview with Gaiman. I tried posting the original interview first, but for some reason it didn't work, so I had to rely on DoG. Anyway, I have started a discussion on the talk page. 101090ABC (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- The issue is the site where the interview is reported. I'd open a discussion and see if the gang is willing to go along with the edit. --Drmargi (talk) 20:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- Even if the information is in an interview with the writer? I'll revert, but I'm starting to think Wikipedia has gone too bureaucratical. 101090ABC (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Your removal of legitimate warning
While you were permitted to remove the warning I issued to you, it was highly inappropriate to falsely characterize it as an "inappropriate warning designed as threat" in your edit comment. That is also considered a form of harassment. You restored content I had removed from my talk page, which is a clear violation of WP:HUSH, which is a policy within WP:HARASS. Therefore, the warning was in no way inappropriate, nor did it contain any type of threat. --76.189.111.199 (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)