User talk:FatTrebla

May 2011

[snipped, see Dominique Strauss-Kahn article.] Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 06:00, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see my response on your talk page. FatTrebla (talk) 06:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

On further observation, I suspect User:Seb az86556 of WP:POV violations of his editing privileges, possibly in collaboration with User:AndyTheGrump. See archived talk page. FatTrebla (talk) 16:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Frank Bailey (footballer)

[snipped] It appears that you recently tried to give Frank Bailey a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history. In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. [snipped] Cind.amuse 13:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the info. WP:Move is handy, tks. FatTrebla (talk) 16:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Heads up

Glad you were able to move the Frank Bailey article. Just wanted you to know that you are free to remove content from your talk page if you want to. No need to snip, although you are free to do so if you desire. The only things that should remain on your page are block and ban notices. Otherwise, go to town. Best regards, Cind.amuse 16:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

lack the deep understanding of the article necessary to edit it

Could you please link me to the place I said the above? I can't find it anywhere, and it does not sound like something I subscribe to! I might be going crazy and have missed it somewhere ;) --Errant ^(chat!) 10:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll look for it now -- juggling a few things. I hope I got it right! ;-) (Apologies in advance, and will rectify, if I didn't...) FatTrebla (talk) 10:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I've addressed this on the Admin page.[1] My apologies if it was confusing, I hope I've clarified it. (Italics were quoting WP policy; "quotations" were in quotes.) FatTrebla (talk) 12:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) - User ErrantX didn't actually say that. Although FatTrebla did put "quote marks" around the comment on the article talkpage, he was, or at least appears to be, not quoting anyone but instead the comment is FatTrebla's interpretation diff of this post from ErrantX. Off2riorob (talk) 12:01, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for piping up, Rob on my Talk page. I correctly put quote marks around quotes from ErrantX, and I put WP policy in italics. I just addressed this in detail on the Admin page (at 12:09pm, evidently while you were writing here[2]), which I think is the appropriate place. What's up with the {tps} template? "A talk page stalker ... is an individual who (perhaps obsessively) keeps an eye on one or more users' talk pages (often via the watchlist) and answers or adds input to threads in which the stalker is not directly involved." This is the first time I've ever posted anything on an Admin or incident page, and the first time I've posted anything from a user's talk page (a relevant quote from Screebo, and what I mean as an olive branch and friendly humor re the FSM photo. I am certainly involved in the DSK-case dispute over bio-info. I was trying to provide the picture as I saw it, to save time for Admins who might evaluate this incident. It's intimidating that in my first time posting there you would slap a (mildly) offensive template on my userpage. I respectfully request that you remove it. Thanks. FatTrebla (talk) 12:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I have responded at AN/I, it might perhaps be best to see if anyone uninvolved wishes to comment there - if you want to discuss the content points rather than extend the report (which tends to put people off commenting :)) I'd be happy to do so here or on my talk page. But we can also do it on AN/I if you want.

Regarding your interpretation of my comments; this was not what I intended to imply. My point was that many of the commentators have worked hard on numerous BLP topics & articles and have a deep understanding of the relevant policy and how it is applied. So when they comment in a discussion (and I mean Rob really here, and to an extent Andy) it is worth listening to their views.

In terms of the {{tps}} Rob is using it to refer to his comment - it is commonly used as a short hand for saying "I saw ErrantX posted this here and I have a quick comment to make...". I can see how the confusion might arise :) --Errant ^(chat!) 12:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)