User talk:Stephen Bain/Archive 7: Difference between revisions
Stephen Bain (talk | contribs) m →[[:Template:Wr]]: reply |
Status of Victorian election campaign |
||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
:I'm not going to delete them again, I'll just let my reasoning stand for itself and someone else can act if they like. I've done my best to explain my reasons [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Removing_warnings_templates|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Arbitrary_section_break|here]] (including why I disregarded the outcomes of the TfD debates). How do you respond to those reasons? --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 06:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
:I'm not going to delete them again, I'll just let my reasoning stand for itself and someone else can act if they like. I've done my best to explain my reasons [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Removing_warnings_templates|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Arbitrary_section_break|here]] (including why I disregarded the outcomes of the TfD debates). How do you respond to those reasons? --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 06:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
||
== Status of [[Victorian election campaign]] == |
|||
:Thanks for your thoughts Stephen, the article hasn't been altered considerably since my message on your talk page though. The consensus at the moment is to wait until after the election before taking a surgeon's knife to it, although how that knife will be wielded has yet to be decided. [[User:Grumpyyoungman01|Grumpyyoungman01]] 07:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:23, 7 November 2006
November Esperanza Newsletter
|
|
|
Sir, I must once again state my disagreement with your removal of a second mention of Menzies from the template. While I see your point, my own argument is based on consistency. Are you willing to remove a second mention of Arvid Lindman from Template:SwedishPrimeMinisters? Of Olusẹgun Ọbasanjọ from Template:NigerianPresidents? Of Grover Cleveland from Template:USPresidents? Of Wilhelm Marx from Template:GermanChancellors? Of Jacques Chirac from Template:FrenchPrimeMinisters? Of Alexandru Averescu from Template:RomanianPrimeMinisters? Of William Lyon Mackenzie King and Pierre Trudeau from Template:CanPM? If so, that would be somewhat drastic. If not, why not? What makes Australia special in this regard? Biruitorul 22:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't really mind about those other templates, but it just happens that this is the way all of the Australian templates have been done for a long time (cf {{VictoriaPremiers}}), and I think it works better. If you mentioned Menzies' second term, you'd have to mention Deakin's second and third terms, and Fisher's second and third terms, plus Hughes' second and third terms, which would get very complicated since they were consecutive, but are actually separate terms since he was leading three different parties.
- It seems much easier to keep all that information at Prime Minister of Australia#List of Prime Ministers, where there's space to fit it all in, and keep the template as a simple list. --bainer (talk) 01:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- You're right that it could get quite messy, but I do think there's reason to back my idea. However, if this is the stable consensus that exists for Australian templates, I suppose we can live with that. Thank you for your explanation. Biruitorul 06:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
With all due respect I think I'll have to dispute your speedy of this one. Removing warnings is considered vandalism per VAND and it is a well known and accepted practice to block / protect user talk pages of users who constantly remove it. I must ask that you restore it..... -- Tawker 05:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Eagle has undeleted them. As I said to him, I'm not going to delete them again, I'll just let my reasoning stand for itself and someone else can act if they like. I will have to disagree with you about these templates. I'm sure that blocking and protection can be used in many cases where a user is removing warnings, for example if a vandal is blanking warnings to confuse future RC patrollers (I'd block them myself in that case). But the problem with the templates is that they imply a universal approach, and policy status, when that is simply not the case. I've expressed these reasons here and here. How would you respond to those arguments? --bainer (talk) 06:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Undeleted the wr templates
I am sorry, but I undeleted these templates according to restoring ... speedy not in sych with this discussion. I don't think CSD was the proper avenue to get these deleted. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 05:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not going to delete them again, I'll just let my reasoning stand for itself and someone else can act if they like. I've done my best to explain my reasons here and here (including why I disregarded the outcomes of the TfD debates). How do you respond to those reasons? --bainer (talk) 06:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Status of Victorian election campaign
- Thanks for your thoughts Stephen, the article hasn't been altered considerably since my message on your talk page though. The consensus at the moment is to wait until after the election before taking a surgeon's knife to it, although how that knife will be wielded has yet to be decided. Grumpyyoungman01 07:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)