User talk:The Banner

I try to the best of my knowledge and belief to contribute to the small red block of the image

Archives (Index)

2024/January 2024/February 2024/March 2024/April 2024/May

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Your IP stalker

I've blocked but I don't have OS so if you still want the material oversighted you'd best email oversight. GoldenRing (talk) 21:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

speedy deletion Ashish Bisht

(Ashih is film Actor His movie Shab is going to release on 14th July he is Main Lead Actor With Raveena Tandon [1] ) --Jinnun (talk) 10:56, 5 July 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinnun (talk • contribs)

The last four times that it was nominated for deletion, the movie Shab was always to be launched soon after. But without any proof. The Banner talk 17:17, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Monogram Pictures

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Monogram Pictures. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

We do not censor

Hi, we actually do. Wikipedia allows for blanking of non-productive and inflammatory forum style posts on talk pages. Particularly those which simply detract from wp policies and have no intention of improving articles. You can restore the deleted content if you like, but you'll actually be causing a detriment to the discussion. Edaham (talk) 15:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

for what it's worth, I've moved the borderline forum style posts to the talk page of the person who begun the non article related complaint. Edaham (talk) 15:35, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Ow, I know that there is a lot of censorship, but most of the time that is hidden behind WP:MEDRS. But this was a clear case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The Banner talk 18:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

the policies you are referring to apply to articles not talk pages. If someone is making completely unrelated posts (again pointing out that the persons post was a complaint about Wikipedia, not a suggestion for article improvement) it is not uncommon for their rantings to be removed, moved or their threads closed. I chose the former because there's and active discussion associated with that thread at the moment and I don't want to close it. Edaham (talk) 23:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Plain avoiding critics and their critical comments... The Banner talk 23:41, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

you are entitled to your opinion. I've directed the person to the appropriate place for complaints on their talk page. Do try to keep discussion on article talk pages confined to the subject of article improvement. Thanks. Edaham (talk) 23:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

In fact that guy was discussing article improvement. The article is way off balance due to the stranglehold of the MEDRS-guys and the alternative-is-always-bad-fake-and-ineffective-guys. You have warriors walking around there that bludgeon everything what is positive! The Banner talk 04:36, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying your position on the subject of alternative medicine. If you are supportive of this subject to the point of buttressing other editors who wish to discredit the encyclopedia on the grounds of an article's content, it is probably best not to edit those kinds of articles, or at least to make sure that POV doesn't cloud your ability to vet sources, and genuine suggestions for introducing content. I have now left the comment there and hopefully it will not throw the conversation off onto another tangent. (See closed thread above). Edaham (talk) 05:41, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Nice way to state your own point of view. But your stance will not fix the off-balance article. The Banner talk 10:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

correct. Fixing the article will fix the article - as opposed to restoring inflammatory comments on talk pages. Edaham (talk) 00:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Than do something about this flawed, biased, unbalanced article and take away the reason why mister Loudmouth is shouting at you. The Banner talk 00:04, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kombucha

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kombucha. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrator election on Dutch Wikinews

Hi, The Banner.

I appreciate that you opposed the approval of that project. But the project was approved, and elections were held according to rules the community established (and which closely resemble the rules at nlwiki, if I am not mistaken).

There is no possible way the stewards will grant immediate permanent admin status to any of them—that's not the way things work. Stewards do decide whether the project is big enough for admins to be permanent, or for 'crats to be appointed, but believe me: that's not the case here. But normally the choice of administrators is up to the project itself, and stewards only handle the magisterial role of (a) checking that the election was done by the local rules and (b) flipping the switch on admin status.

If you want to object to the election of any of the individuals as sysop, your only real option is to get involved in the project and then oppose the candidates. And at that, if you are trying to undermine the project, your !vote will probably be discounted, and rightly so.

At this point I'd encourage you to give the members of the Dutch Wikinews community the chance to sink or swim on their own. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

There will be no need from outside activity to blow up that project. They are perfectly capable of doing that themselves. I will be surprised when it makes the end of the year.

Still, I like your bad faith assumption when I am just asking for a clarification. The Banner talk 21:50, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

The reason I made the comment here was to put a little space between my comment and the instant discussion. Still, you are quite right about my not having assumed good faith, and I apologize for that.

I hope my answer over on Meta was satisfactory for the time being. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:03, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Rather unclear, but for now it will do. The Banner talk 22:04, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

There is no clearer answer for now. Basically, the stewards will give them 3–6 months right now. If the project never gets much bigger (in terms of contributors), the term may lengthen to about a year at a time, but it will remain a temporary administratorship, and could stay that way indefinitely. If the project attracts a larger group of editors, the term could be extended to two years, or eventually even be converted to a permanent adminship. But that's going to be at minimum a couple of years down the road, possibly longer, and maybe never, depending on what happens. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:09, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017

• News and notes: French chapter woes, new affiliates and more WMF team changes

• Featured content: Spectacular animals, Pine Trees screens, and more

• In the media: Concern about access and fairness, Foundation expenditures, and relationship to real-world politics and commerce

• Recent research: The chilling effect of surveillance on Wikipedia readers

• Op-ed: Why Task Forces are Dying in 2017

• Gallery: A mix of patterns

• Humour: The Infobox Game

• Traffic report: Film, television and Internet phenomena reign with some room left over for America's birthday

• Technology report: New features in development; more breaking changes for scripts

• Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 3 wrap-up

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox country

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox country. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Possible block looming

You are now the subject of a discussion at WP:ANI here regarding possible disciplinary action for edit warring at Peacock Alley (restaurant). Akld guy (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

The classic case of trying to block when you have run out of arguments. The Banner talk 02:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Your user page

As you requested:

I am a Dutchman but since a couple of years living in County Clare, Ireland, Ireland.

• I am a Dutchman who has been living for a couple of years...
• I am a Dutchman living, since 2016, in...
• I am a Dutchman but have been living, since 2016, in... Done

It is remarkable that Wikipedia is claiming not to be a site for advertising and promotion, but on the other hand it is extremely difficult to remove spammy articles.

• I'm having trouble with this sentence. I'm not sure you understand the definition of spam. As it stands, the text contains two statements which aren't really related. The claim in the first part can't be tied to the difficulty described in the second, so linking them just seems wrong. Done

This is due to the many editors claiming that normal editing should do the trick but fail to improve the spammy articles they say that can be improved. This is seriously undermining Wikipedia's stance against advertising and promotion.

• The same difficulty applies to the concept; but for grammar:
• This is due to many editors claiming...
• This is due to the many editors who claim...

(There's a subtle difference: the first just states there are many editors; the second implies an indication of what "many" means has already been discussed.)

• ...they say can be improved. This seriously undermines...  Done

I treat everybody exactly the same.

• Arguably should be "I treat everybody in exactly the same way.", but some might consider the criticism pedantic. Not done

...no matter how important somebody is (or thinks to be)

• ...no matter how important somebody is (or thinks they are) Done

...detrimental for the encyclopaedia

• ...detrimental to the encyclopaedia Done

You can find load of pictures in...

• You can find loads of pictures in... Done

...how do I find coordinates for an article. Coordinates tool is very handy for this.

• ...how do I find coordinates for an article? The Coordinates tool is very handy for this. Done

...sometimes you want to know what articles you have created. Just check that here.

• ...sometimes you want to know what articles you have created. Simply check here. Done

Bazza (talk) 14:25, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Except for one thing, I have done everything. The part of the criticism is supposed to be harsh and critical. When you call it "pedantic", I have found the right note. The Banner talk 08:20, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have written that more clearly. I was referring to my own pedantic criticism of your sentence. Better would have been "...but some might consider my criticism pedantic.". I have not offered any opinion on the views you have expressed, simply your English grammar and style. Happy to help. Bazza (talk) 09:51, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

FYI

The Banner, see Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Peacock_Alley_.28restaurant.29. Marrakech (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

You are forumhopping and following me around. Stop this nonsense. The Banner talk 21:39, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:White privilege

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:White privilege. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

1RR on Troubles article violations

You know the restrictions imposed on Trouble related articles and you seem intent on violating them in your edit-war with Melbguy05. I have notified them of these restrictions. What is your reason for ignoring them considering you are versed in it going by your direct quote of it, which shows you have read it? Mabuska ^(talk) 21:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

You think I remember something out of 2015? But I apologies for my indiscretion to make two different edits. The Banner talk 21:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)