User talk:Fowler&fowler

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

Long time[edit]

no talk mr Fowler, hope all is well :) I know of Lingzhi with about 10 years, and will vouch for his good intentions and integrity. Its always hard when people you like bang heads, but it happens, the joys of the internet, eh. There is no right or wrong in such situations, but see you are mending fences, thank you. Its a very substantial subject, it would be just great to have you onside; the rewrite was a huge undertaking; am glad your approach is lets help out from here. Ceoil (talk) 18:02, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi there! Long time since we worked on the Lucy stuff, or more accurately you guys wrote it and I hovered around. Now I'm not even sure it was Lucy, but I do remember fishing out my 1864 copy of the Golden Treasury for it. Where is everyone now? Glad to see you are around! Yes, Lingzhi has put in a stalwart effort and has my admiration. I became a little frustrated, but it is nothing that the passage of a day or two won't fix. See you around, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:21, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Frustration seems to be daily bread on wiki, its our curse; pride or whatever the hell. I have watched Ling build up the article over the last year and a half, and am frankly delighted to see you hovering around; you have a lot to offer here. Just be nice! Ceoil (talk) 19:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Please be WP:CIVIL[edit]

The comment here. This doesn't seem rather civil to me, and given WP:DEADLINE, and that give nthat you're completely dismissing my points, including a very important one in response to your longest comment under 'Discussion'. The RfC has not nearly run for its due course, and there are still many issues to iron out even if we go with the majority vote. I'd appreciate it if you'd actually address legitimate concerns instead of dismissing them poetically. ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ тʌʟк 20:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Merging of PVC recipients page[edit]

Thanks for raising the concerns about the PVC recipients list page, and contributing in keeping the standards of Wikipedia up. So I would like to put forward the steps to merge. As enough content is available in Recipients section of PVC article, I will just copy-paste the list into this section, and blank the former list page, and place a redirect to this section. Is this fine, or would you like to suggest anything else? Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Sounds good to me. Thanks for doing this. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Done. Please have a look if everything is fine. Apart from this, will the PVC article be a potentially eligible for a FLC or FAC. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
FAC, no. Not enough meat in it. Not many reliable sources. Same as with Bharat Ratna. FLC, probably. Let me think about how best that should be done. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Will hopefully wait for your reply. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
For your marvelous scrutiny of List of Param Vir Chakra recipients and its parent article. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Thank you, a very pleasant surprise! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Largest city[edit]

When we place largest city field in infobox, which criteria is considered like population or area?--Vin09(talk) 12:23, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Population, I think. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:20, 26 April 2017 (UTC)