User talk:Lotusduck: Difference between revisions
imported>SomeStranger fixed link |
imported>SomeStranger m removed template, made you appear in the category |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
== There shall be no more snide remarks, or there shall be no more lotusduck == | == There shall be no more snide remarks, or there shall be no more lotusduck == | ||
*Here, I've made you a [[:Template:NeedsReview|nifty little template]] you can use instead of your snide remarks. <nowiki>{{NeedsReview}}</nowiki> will put it right in for you, without your needing any additional comment. It will appear as follows: | *Here, I've made you a [[:Template:NeedsReview|nifty little template]] you can use instead of your snide remarks. <nowiki>{{NeedsReview}}</nowiki> will put it right in for you, without your needing any additional comment. It will appear as follows: "(This may not be entirely accurate and needs to be double checked.)" --[[User:Jinya|jin]] 03:06, 25 April 2006 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 13:33, 25 April 2006
Hey there. When you see references that you don't think have anything to do with the page, would you mind either removing them, or throwing something about 'em on the discussion page? You've got the right idea there, but adding comments like "although I don't see how" to the end of references is really the wrong way to go about it. --Ricket 07:17, 30 March 2006 (CST)
I completely understand the comedy thing. What I don't understand is why the comments you add have to be on the item's page, rather than the talk page. Your comments just seems out of place on this wiki, as it is currently written. --Ricket 05:30, 31 March 2006 (CST)
Problems with References
Lotus, if you have a problem with a reference, please keep it on the discussion pages until a resolution/consensus is reached. Adding "Sheesh" or "Not likely" or other such comments that you have been adding lately, is beginning to tick me off. If you keep it up, I'll disable you from making changes at all. SEVERAL of the admins and other editors have reverted your changes with comments to this effect. Please take note. --jin 01:22, 24 April 2006 (CDT)
Response to your comment on my talk page.
- No, leaving a snide comment is not going to fix anything. I don't see why you feel a tag of some form would not work on this wiki, as now that you mention it, it seems like an entirely possible method. Your approach, however, has done nothing more than tick me off. I'm not objecting to a page directly saying something is probably NOT a reference to X because of X. What I -am- objecting to is saying "This is a reference to X. Pshaw! As if monkey would fly out of my butt!" (exaggeration included for effect). It's in the wording you've chosen to use wherein the problem lies. We can look into using tags or some other method of flagging possibly inaccurate references, but we can not continue to harbor snide comments in said section, no matter how snide you feel you are. --jin 23:29, 24 April 2006 (CDT)
There shall be no more snide remarks, or there shall be no more lotusduck
- Here, I've made you a nifty little template you can use instead of your snide remarks. {{NeedsReview}} will put it right in for you, without your needing any additional comment. It will appear as follows: "(This may not be entirely accurate and needs to be double checked.)" --jin 03:06, 25 April 2006 (CDT)
