User talk:Aerosprite

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

WT:UTM

All you have to do is participate in the discussions. None of us understand what is you are doing and why you are doing it unilaterally. You have been invited to participate, but you have not responded a single time. (See here and here.) We eagerly await your participation in the project! You have a lot of energy that could be put to great and tremendous use in the UTM area. But, work there is done collegially and almost never executed without prior discussion on the talk page. Changes in that area almost always come after arriving at a consensus.

I urge you not to throw your hands up and leave. Rather, I urge you to participate on the talk page and share your new ideas with everyone on the UTM team. Thanks! — Spike Toronto 03:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Echoing SpikeToronto, while I appreciate the BOLD! nature of your changes, I do not understand them. Wikipedia works at its very best when editors with disparate viewpoints and perspectives work together to build consensus. However if you do not join the discussion, how can we understand your changes and possibly create a new consensus? — Kralizec! (talk) 16:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Uw-hoax2

Template:Uw-hoax2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pol430 talk to me 10:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Uw-Username-blatant

A tag has been placed on Template:Uw-Username-blatant requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. Pol430 talk to me 23:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Aerosprite, you recent edits to Template:Uw-agf2 and Template:Uw-agf3 have been reverted and the changes you made are being discussed at WT:UTM. Pol430 talk to me 12:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits (2)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More of your recent edits

Aerosprite — I, and other members of WP:UW and WP:UTM have asked you on at least two previous occasions, to discuss changes to the uw- series of templates before making them; however, you have continued to edit unilaterally such as this edit and have not engaged in prior discussion or responded to any concerns raised about your edits at WT:UTM. All the editors that have commentated on your edits previously have assumed good faith, I will now make no faith assumption about your edits, but will assume you are suffering from a lack of WP:CLUE. Accordingly, I appeal to you, one last time, to engage in discussion before making edits to uw- templates. Finally, if you had left this template alone, it would have been deleted very soon per the CSD tag already applied. Blanking the page, as you did here and adding an edit summary of "PLEASE DELETE THIS TEMPLATE" will not correctly identify it for deletion. I have rectified this. Pol430 talk to me 00:29, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious what your message would look like if you assumed bad faith. Can you put your message at the bottom, but label it as a "fake message". OK? Thanks. Aerosprite the Legendary Leave me a message! 01:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aerosprite, you know what I like about you: your energy, your enthusiasm, and the fact that you obviously care about protecting Wikipedia from vandals and other miscreants. However, you are unwilling to engage in any conversation with other editors regarding your edits. You act unilaterally without consultation and consensus.

When you are editing an article (e.g., Lena Horne, and just about any item in Wikipedia:Main namespace, (i.e., the mainspace at Wikipedia)), a certain amount of leeway and unilateralism is permitted. In fact, editors are encouraged to follow the bold, revert, discuss cycle when editing articles. (See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (shortcut → WP:BRD).)

However, when editing anything in the template namespace (see Wikipedia:Template namespace), you are expected to have consensus for your changes before making them (see Wikipedia:Consensus (shortcut → WP:CON)). The only changes to a template that you can make unilaterally are things that could be marked minor (see Help:Minor edit (shortcut → WP:MINOR)). Otherwise, you ought never act unilaterally in the template namespace. This is most especially true when editing any template in the uw- series of templates (see Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace (shortcut → WP:UTM) for a list).

Consensus for changes to templates in the uw- series of templates is arrived at by posting your proposed changes in a new thread at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace (shortcut → WT:UTM). Once consensus for your change is arrived at, you may then make those changes — and only those changes — to the template discussed. (For non uw- templates, changes are discussed on their respective talk pages.)

So far, you have been cut a lot of slack because most of the people involved with WP:UTM/WT:UTM and Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings (shortcut → WP:UW) are editors who assume good faith (see Wikipedia:Assume good faith (shortcut → WP:AGF)) and do not want to drive away new Wikipedians (see Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers (shortcut → WP:BITE)). However, you should note that, if you persist, and choose not to proceed collegially and collectively by discussing your changes at WT:UTM, and/or responding to comments here on your talk page, you are most likely going to end up have your editing privileges suspended until such time as you begin responding.

I would hate to see that happen. As I have said to you before, if you could channel your energy toward working within the established process for making changes to templates — i.e., posting your proposed changes at WT:UTM — you could make tremendous contributions to Wikipedia. Please engage us in this conversation here on your talk page. Thanks! — Spike Toronto 05:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! Aerosprite the Legendary Leave me a message!

I'm not quite sure weather this edit is a serious question, or attempt at flippancy? I will attempt to answer it seriously and say that had I chosen to assume bad faith—as result of your unilateral edits to uw- templates and other concerns such as this edit which you labeled as vandalism, not long before making this unilateral page move—then I would probably have started a thread at WP:ANI and sent you a message to that effect. Pol430 talk to me 22:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In general, Aerosprite, good/bad faith assumptions regarding warning templates are as follows:

Level 1 – An advisory. Assumes good faith. Generally includes "Welcome to Wikipedia" or some variant.

Level 2 – No faith assumption; just a note.

Level 3 – Assumes bad faith; cease and desist. Generally includes "Please stop".

Level 4 – Final warning. Assumes bad faith; strong cease and desist, last warning.

Level 4im – Only warning. Assumes bad faith; very strong cease and desist, first and only warning. Generally used in the case of excessive or continuous disruption from a user or, more often, a specific IP.

So, the template that assumes bad faith in any multi-level series is a Level 3 template. As a rule, however, one should try to always start at Level 1 … Level 2 if you must. Thanks! — Spike Toronto 23:18, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Spike, I suppose I was unsure of how to take the question asked of me, but through our joint efforts, have covered both connotations :) Pol430 talk to me 23:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for answering me, too! Aerosprite the Legendary Leave me a message! 14:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Tallest Man on Earth

Just so we don't get into an edit war, I wanted to let you know that I've moved the article back to its original name because he is more well known under said moniker. Everything he has released and every bit of press he gets is under the name The Tallest Man on Earth. Please see WP:COMMONNAME.

User:Aerosprite/Sandbox2 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User:Aerosprite/Sandbox2. Since you had some involvement with the User:Aerosprite/Sandbox2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). – Ajl^talk 10:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]