User talk:FleetCommand

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

Apology[edit]

So, a while back you said some words against AussieLegend that I found to be objectionable, because they showed up suddenly in my watchlist, I thought them mean-spirited, passive-aggressive, and a variety of other this-and-thats that are probably no longer relevant. I felt strongly against your words in the moment and wanted to clearly send a message that as a fellow editor I didn't care for that sort of attack against another editor. It was not my intention to demean you as a person or to demean your contributions, so if you interpreted it as such, that was a failure on my part. That said, I would like it if we could move past these superficialities and get back to normal civil discourse without any lingering prejudices, because vandals are our usual enemies, and we treat them with far more civility than they deserve. Both you and Aussie have contributed tons, so as a show of good faith, and with the hope that whatever existing fires can be quenched, I apologize to you for my irritated and sharp comments. Respectfully, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for the editing of "Usage share" section of "Microsoft Windows" article. Now the table looks more neat. All the best. Nicolas Love (talk) 09:35, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome. Fleet Command (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Shouldn't this section have a link to Microsoft Windows#Usage share? .. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Not mandatory at all. Fleet Command (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if I seemed pissy...[edit]

...in my edit summary just now. I'm dealing with one of those bull-in-china-shop types somewhere else just at the moment. EEng (talk) 20:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Halloween cheer![edit]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks very much for the kitten and your kind words! Cloudbound (talk) 18:36, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Christmas tree sxc hu.jpg

Wishing you a merry Christmas and a happy new year...

Codename Lisa (talk)

Reversion of addition to List of disk partitioning software[edit]

Could you please help me understand why my addition was reverted? If it was because I linked to an article that does not yet exist, there is another item on the list linked to an article that also doesn't exist and that item has not been removed. If so, can you cite the rule that states adding links to undefined articles is against the rules on Wikipedia, please? Thanks! .digamma (talk) 23:25, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey
Wikipedia is not a directory of everything. We don't list just any app. They need have either a Wikipedia article or evidence of notability.
FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 11:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
The policy states from the article you referenced, "Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles." Under what qualifications have you identified Acronis' partition manager Disk Director as not notable? Also, please prove the authority of those qualifications. My evidence for notability of the software is given by the fact it has secured 7 awards of merit and has existed for over a decade. That appears plenty notable to me and most likely other Wikipedia admins. Fortunately, this list is not large. If you enjoy chopping down lists, please go chop down the List of real-time strategy video games list. Ranish Partition Manager is a DOS tool, freeware and no longer maintained, isn't that not notable? In fact, an argument could be made against all items no longer maintained. However, that argument wouldn't stand against PartitionMagic. Your determination of evidence on Disk Director lacking notability is arbitrary and unfounded. Please restore my edit. .digamma (talk) 11:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
.digamma
You asked good questions. I have answers.
First, and most important of all, know that I hate and don't acknowledge "other stuff exists" kind of discussions. Wikipedia is VAST and my reach is limited. I won't go fix all problems of one sort just to prove they are problem.
Second, about the sentence you have quoted from WP:N: Where is the proof that List of disk partitioning software as a group or set is notable? Notability requires verifiable evidence and the burden of proof is with the contributor; that's you.
Third, about your question "Under what qualifications have you identified Acronis' partition manager Disk Director as not notable?" I have not. As I said above the burden of proving that it is so lies with you. More importantly, I don't even require notability proven directly. Having an article is enough. (Although, I can theoretically contest the notability of the article, have it deleted, and then come for the link in the list.)
Fourth, notability is not temporary. Once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage.
FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 14:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


Thank you for your contemplated answers to my questions and I recognize that showing notability is my responsibility, as the editor adding the content. However, I fear I have wasted your time because the simplest requirement in the policy I quoted above, is for any item to be included in a list it need not be independently notable. That makes this discussion entirely irrelevant and, again, my post needs to be restored.
Secondly, and this is only tangential to the discussion, I've already established how Disk Director is independently notable as being recognized publicly by independent award nominating sources. The tenure and user base of the software, albeit an aspect of still lesser significance, is another publicly recognized fact. Considering your claim and the policy, I'm surprised you marked this for a notability issue, it was rather unnecessary and irrelevant. To qualify for consideration of notability, the list must be large, which incidentally is hilariously small.
That said, historically you've contested to many other editors in the past items must be notable and have reverted numerous good-faith additions on this basis, but this claim is simply not part of Wikipedia's policy regarding list items. I fear for you the consequences of such policy violations could be poignantly severe. .digamma (talk) 01:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, FleetCommand. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Image request[edit]

Hi there! I saw you listed as open to requests on the Illustration taskforce, and was hoping you might indulge me with one. Is there any chance you could make the background transparent for this photo? It would look pretty great by itself (see, e.g., this photo), but unfortunately the background gets in the way. If willing to help, please just remove everything but the helmet, including the spaces where the background shows through between the cheek guards and the neck guard. (With regards to the background showing through the eyes, however, I'm not sure if it would look better transparent, or just blacked out such as in the photo linked above. That's a judgment call.)

Many thanks if you're able to help, but not worries if not! --Usernameunique (talk) 10:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, FleetCommand![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

References

  1. ^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. ^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Edit notes[edit]

Please stop with calling other editors morons in your edit summaries, per WP:NPA. -- ferret (talk) 13:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ferret: Are vandals considered editors? FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 13:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Civility is expected even then, nor are the edits at Xbox One system software vandalism. -- ferret (talk) 13:44, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@Ferret: I suppose they are not. But he insulted me when he reverted without an edit summary, effectively calling me a vandal. He has closed all avenues of talking with his attitude. I don't suppose taking this issue to talk page is an option in my future treatment of the matter. Also, there is another question: Where do you fit into any of this? I don't suppose you are watching that article, are you? FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 13:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I am watching the article. The article's talk page is the appropriate venue for discussing the target of the website link. -- ferret (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:COMODO Internet Security v5 icon.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:COMODO Internet Security v5 icon.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]