Starblueheather
 |
|
Please be sure to read the edit summary next time before reverting edits as I explained in the edit summary that I was in the middle of writing the article about Howard (hence the linking and removal of the photo of him from the Schlock article). Thanks! ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 08:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- I read you edit summary. Please be sure to create your link target BEFORE you link to it, rather than creating a bunch of useless circular links and making wikipedia crappier for hours. Thanks! Starblueheather (talk) 13:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
AfDs edit
Hi. As you just participated in discussions on a closely related topic (also a current AfD re a Jewish list), which may raise some of the same issues, I'm simply mentioning that the following are currently ongoing: AfDs re lists of Jewish Nobel laureates, entertainers, inventors, actors, cartoonists, and heavy metal musicians. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Jersey Circus edit
As a participant in the recent discussion, you are no doubt aware that there was no consensus to delete or merge the content of Jersey Circus. As such, your repetitive deletion of the content of this article is bordering on willful vandalism. - Dravecky (talk) 06:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- Woah, woah, woah. Merging is not deletion, nor is it "willful vandalism." If you believe in cooperation, compromise, and building consensus, you should do away with tossing around wild accusations and insults like that. And, as a participant in the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jersey_Circus discussion, you are no doubt aware that there that the closing admin thought there wasn't a consensus for anything; however, that doesn't mean we refrain from improving our encyclopedia's coverage of this topic. Many of the people, including some who cast a "keep" not-a-vote, thought a good way to improve the encyclopedia's coverage of this topic was through merging, and that seemed to me to be a good compromise between the "keep" and the "delete" sides. What is you rationale against merging? Why do you believe that this topic cannot be adequately covered in a way that is most helpful to readers in, for example, The_Family_Circus#Parody? Thanks, Starblueheather (talk) 22:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- I appreciate the thoughtfulness and consideration that you must be putting into your response by taking a week to formulate your thoughts on this topic, but I am afraid you may be over-thinking things; a brief, off-the-cuff response would be fine. Thanks, Starblueheather (talk) 23:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Webcomics: animated comics edit
Hey Starblueheather! You left a comment a few days ago on the discussion page of the webcomics article, about seeking out references for the article's section on animated webcomics, which I argued didn't cite a good example. I've given a couple of, I think, fair examples of in the discussion page, but no one else has weighed with an opinion on their soundness. Would you mind checking them out and giving your thoughts? I'd like to get another view on the matter other than just my own. Cheers Visual Error (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)