User talk:Amaury/2010/September
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Since you are changing the name from Nokia Theater and Nokia Plaza to Best Buy Theater and Best Buy Plaza, do you have a source? And if the name has changed then the article should have the origional name, the current name and mention the circumstances or date of the name change. ClamDip (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- If you look at the some of the articles relating to "Nokia", you'll see that it's a former name. - Amaury (talk) 01:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, but remember WP fails as a reliable source and if I search for Nokia Plaza and end up redirected to L.A. Live, there is nothing in that article that tells me about a name change or if the page is what I was looking for. ClamDip (talk) 01:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- I don't know where you are getting your information (seeing as you have failed to provide a reliable source to support your claims) but per LAlive.com the venues are still currently known under Nokia's naming rights. --UnquestionableTruth-- 02:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ahhhhhhhhhh ok. Before anyone runs their mouths any further ahem... apparently, what we have here is failure to communicate. After a quick look through your edits, this one in particular caught my attention. According to this New York Times article the Nokia/AEG facility being renamed is the one in Times Square, New York, NOT the facilities located at LA Live. "A spokeswoman for Nokia said it did not renew its deal for the Times Square theater partly because the company wanted to focus on “reaching customers where they consume content, online, as opposed to at a physical venue.” Nokia still has arrangements with AEG for two prominent spaces in Los Angeles, the 7,000-capacity Nokia Theater and the 2,400-capacity Club Nokia." Hope this clears up any misunderstanding...--UnquestionableTruth-- 03:12, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Username change request
The message below from Bongomatic is a response to a message I left at User talk:Nihonjoe: Comment.
In re this comment, I didn't intend to imply that was your reason to change user name. Rather, I meant to suggest that, as it would be an effect of a username, and that the effect is undesirable for the community, the request should have been rejected or given more consideration than approved on the basis of SoxBot Beta's findings. Bongomatic 05:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
consensus is basically majority. doens't matter if there is an involved party or not. if more than the majority agree, then we comply, unless you can convince us that it shouldn't be mentioned. and again this is getting close to an edit war, you =simply cannot revert an edit and not discuss it in the discussion section. the rule is bold edit, revert, discuss. there is no discussion from you in the discussion section. Bread Ninja (talk) 00:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, Zhou Yu
Welcome to Wikipedia, Zhou Yu ;) On a different note, I want you to know that I'm not ignoring your previous inquiry. I really wanted to review the entire situation instead of giving a half-informed opinion. However, I have been working 6 days a week and about 12 hours a day lately, at least until Thursday when I (hopefully just temporarily) lost most of my vision in my left eye. So, hopefully, once everything calms down, I'll get back to where I can spend actual time here instead of just popping in for a couple of minutes here and there. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 21:55, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, as soon as you can, please. :) I suggest one month a week instead of all the months at once until you're caught up. We don't want you getting exhausted. :) Let me know when you're going to do it so I can pull up where you need to start in your archives. - Amaury (talk) 23:59, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
After looking at the edits to Fred Figglehorn, I'm inclined to agree with User:117Avenue that your edits do not comply with WP:MOSDATE. Dates should be written without ordinal suffixes (September 30, 2010, not September 30th, 2010). Additionally, for sorting purposes, dates should be written in year-month-day order. Please look back over the manual of style for dates, and feel free to ask if you have any questions. —C.Fred (talk) 05:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
- Re: the AIV report against you, I agree that it is drastic. Please see my reply to it—as well as the note that WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring may be the correct venue for a report against you if you make further reverts to the article. —C.Fred (talk) 05:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)