User talk:CycloneYoris/Archive 11
 | This 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. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Please comment on Talk:Sobibór trial
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sobibór trial. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Fascism in Europe
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fascism in Europe. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Thank U, Next
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Thank U, Next. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Solomon's Pools
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Solomon's Pools. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 April 2019
- News and notes: An Action Packed April
- In the media: Is Wikipedia just another social media site?
- Discussion report: English Wikipedia community's conclusions on talk pages
- Featured content: Anguish, accolades, animals, and art
- Arbitration report: An Active Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Mötley Crüe, Notre-Dame, a black hole, and Bonnie and Clyde
- Technology report: A new special page, and other news
- Gallery: Notre-Dame de Paris burns
- News from the WMF: Can machine learning uncover Wikipedia’s missing “citation needed” tags?
- Recent research: Female scholars underrepresented; whitepaper on Wikidata and libraries; undo patterns reveal editor hierarchy
- From the archives: Portals revisited
Please comment on Template talk:English grammar
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:English grammar. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Qizilbash
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Qizilbash. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/May 23
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/May 23. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Ainu language
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ainu language. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
If you have a problem with an editor or their edits...
Say it on their talk page. Don't go from page to page after them and indirectly undo most of their edits. It is absolutely leadworthy that songs whose sole purpose for being were as entrants in Eurovision did or did not make the final. The lead is a summary of the contents of the article, or supposed to be. It is therefore important to note their performance in the lead. Ss112 23:35, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Ss112: Wow, calm down! FYI, I did not "undo" your edits, I simply moved the content you were adding from the lead into another section within the article. If you notice in previous editions of the contest, from 2017 and 2018 to be exact, none of the song articles mention anything about their non qualification in the lead; take a look at Montenegro's song Inje from last year and Space from 2017. These articles are supposed to emphasize more on the song and not just on their participation at Eurovision, since most of these songs even chart in some territories, it is inaccurate to say that they were just made for Eurovision. By the way, I don't have a problem with your edits, that is obviously why I didn't think it was necessary to write a comment on your talk page regarding this "issue", which isn't even an issue to begin with. I seriously don't get why you've made such a big deal about this. CycloneYoris talk! 06:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- Are you for real right now, tagging me in retaliatory edit summaries? As I said, perhaps you need to learn proper grammar and do a quick Google search if you think "did not progress to" is not proper grammar. Progress is both a noun and a verb. Here it was being used as a verb. I encourage you, Google it. It absolutely is correct grammar—I'd love to know how you think it isn't. If you still think it isn't, perhaps we can get a copy editor from the GOCE to tell you it is. The song did not gain enough points to qualify or progress to the final. Either wording is fine because they both mean the same damn thing—simple as that. I don't care what previous Eurovision articles have done. That's an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. What's been done in the past or elsewhere is not always best for others. No need to ping me. Ss112 09:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- Why shouldn't I ping you? You did the same thing to me when you reverted all of my edits on the Az én apám article. There is certainly nothing wrong with trying to make grammar corrections to your edits; I also encourage you to be civil when writing on my talk page, you come off as being rude and impertinent and there is no need to act in that manner, especially since I haven't been rude to you. CycloneYoris talk! 10:02, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- I meant no need to ping me when you reply here. Also, they're not "corrections", you are talking about preferred wording within Eurovision articles because the show uses the word "qualify". There's a difference between preference and an actual mistake. Unless there is a Eurovision style guide that says we must say "qualify", even though readers will gather exactly the same thing—that Eurovision is a competition, the song was an entry and did not make the final—there is no need to change it. You are being rude—you tagged me in an edit summary claiming I made a grammar mistake as a way of retaliating against me because you're annoyed. Get over it. I also used the wording "qualify" on some articles, but I chose not to do this on all of them to change it up so I was not just copypasting the same sentence. If you continue changing all articles you can find that I've edited to say "qualify", we will have a more of an issue and I will involve an admin because that will not be a correction, it will be you having it out for somebody else. Bye. Ss112 10:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- As far as I know, everyone inside the Eurovision world uses the word "qualify" instead of "progressed" when referring to a song that did not reach the final. Why should I be annoyed about that? Don't be silly. And please stop posting messages here on my talk page, we have already seemed to have resolved this issue and there is no need to dwell on it any longer. Bye. CycloneYoris talk! 11:07, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- I meant no need to ping me when you reply here. Also, they're not "corrections", you are talking about preferred wording within Eurovision articles because the show uses the word "qualify". There's a difference between preference and an actual mistake. Unless there is a Eurovision style guide that says we must say "qualify", even though readers will gather exactly the same thing—that Eurovision is a competition, the song was an entry and did not make the final—there is no need to change it. You are being rude—you tagged me in an edit summary claiming I made a grammar mistake as a way of retaliating against me because you're annoyed. Get over it. I also used the wording "qualify" on some articles, but I chose not to do this on all of them to change it up so I was not just copypasting the same sentence. If you continue changing all articles you can find that I've edited to say "qualify", we will have a more of an issue and I will involve an admin because that will not be a correction, it will be you having it out for somebody else. Bye. Ss112 10:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- Why shouldn't I ping you? You did the same thing to me when you reverted all of my edits on the Az én apám article. There is certainly nothing wrong with trying to make grammar corrections to your edits; I also encourage you to be civil when writing on my talk page, you come off as being rude and impertinent and there is no need to act in that manner, especially since I haven't been rude to you. CycloneYoris talk! 10:02, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- Are you for real right now, tagging me in retaliatory edit summaries? As I said, perhaps you need to learn proper grammar and do a quick Google search if you think "did not progress to" is not proper grammar. Progress is both a noun and a verb. Here it was being used as a verb. I encourage you, Google it. It absolutely is correct grammar—I'd love to know how you think it isn't. If you still think it isn't, perhaps we can get a copy editor from the GOCE to tell you it is. The song did not gain enough points to qualify or progress to the final. Either wording is fine because they both mean the same damn thing—simple as that. I don't care what previous Eurovision articles have done. That's an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. What's been done in the past or elsewhere is not always best for others. No need to ping me. Ss112 09:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Falun Gong
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Falun Gong. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)