User talk:Danielkueh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Barnstar[edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Rhodesia[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Danielkueh. You have new messages at Talk:British Empire#Rhodesia.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Peer Review of Flying Spaghetti Monster[edit]

Hi! I have listed Flying Spaghetti Monster for peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Flying Spaghetti Monster/archive1. any input on how to improve the article would be very much appreciated. Thanks! --

If we have misunderstood each other...[edit]

...then if you're interested, I'm happy to try and figure out where we went wrong. Any misattributions were unintentional (as I'm sure yours were as well). For my part, I do feel like you've misread my comments quite a few times, e.g. assuming that my two paragraphs was a draft for the entire lead when I had said otherwise. There are a few other examples as well, and I can describe them if you like, but I'd be more interested in knowing what you saw as misattribution on my part, since I try to be as careful as possible in reading and responding. Sunrise (talk) 08:02, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out to me but I don't think it would be a good use of either one of our time to dwell on past comments. If you feel that I or any other editor misunderstood your comments, then all you need to do is restate them clearly or explain them further. That's usually sufficient. Thus, rather than revisiting old discussions here, I recommend spending more time refining the lead proposal, which is much more fruitful and promising. I will give input from time to time. But really, I am supposed to be retired from Wikipedia. :)
On a side note, I was not initially interested in the second sentence. It was the first sentence that caught my attention, which I found to be in such an appalling state that I cannot in good conscience just walk away. Hence, the resumption of my edits on the science page. danielkueh (talk) 10:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Alright. :-) I agree with your comment on the first sentence - I remember that I saw the diff (of the original edit) and thought it didn't look right, but decided at the time not to revert until I had looked at it more closely. On misunderstandings, I do try to restate/explain, though I prefer to weave it into the flow of dialogue to avoid being confrontational. In any case, I agree that continuing work on the proposal is a good idea . See you on the talk page! Sunrise (talk) 08:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)