232:, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.
366:
as yours. You seem to be rather aggressive about this, and about saying I was insisting on using the word (when that's not the case), when
Armbrust did not make the argument about misuse of terminology but put forward a stubborn resistance just because a specific word didn't appear in the source; it's clear he didn't have the misuse of terminology in mind otherwise he would have articulated it. You say the usage isn't supported in reliable sources, but I've shown above that it is. And a link to SOAPBOX is wholly inappropriate here. I agree more stuff about these issues should be put down in guidelines; perhaps you could start this yourself?
31:
132:
277:
201:
119:
304:
Can you be more specific? Most of my comments were about specifics of the debate. One was critical of a particular party to the debate (I don't remember who or care; for me this is about the terminology and logic, not the editors) as being apparently unwilling to compromise and being insistent upon
365:
uses it in his reports so you must also be accusing him of misusing terminology. Based on that I think accusations of OR are a bit extreme. So too when you say I'm not willing to compromise when I already have (see above), and before anyone has put forward such a well(if forcefully)-argued rationale
235:
Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us
216:
this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog
321:
who normally wouldn't care to get involved, and this all started about half a month ago, which is too long for this nitpick to still be an issue. I could alter the comment in some way, I suppose, but I don't have any clear idea what about it is objectionable. Being constructively critical about
360:
I don't think there was any need to go through the thread and make point-by-point responses, and I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be. Like I said, the word is widely used by snooker commentators who must presumably know something about sporting terminology. Even
288:
I don't think the tone and content of some of your comments were entirely appropriate. If you see the thread, you'll see things are not quite how you're putting it. When I saw your first comments, I thought, fair enough, good points. But your second set of comments left a bad impression.
305:
a particular personal definition of "forfeit" as being not only correct but somehow indicative that the word was the correct one to use in this case. I don't feel I need to retract that criticism, as the editor in question has been bordering on
393:
I saw that and responded there. Also re-read the whole thread, and I admit (twice) that I think I simply misunderstood your position on the issue, and I'm sorry for being overly argumentative. Resolved for me, as well. ā
159:
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --
225:
help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.
229:
153:
145:. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the
240:, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.
243:
Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.
378:
I hope this addresses some of your comments. I don't know whether you want to continue the debate or not; for me, it's basically resolved.
179:
208:
Marked myself "unavailable" as an adopter for the time being; I have barely enough time to do any WP at all for the immediate future.
142:
408:
344:
94:
89:
84:
72:
67:
59:
317:
a redundant noticeboard filing as well as an odd, multi-party freeforall on a user talk page, attracting the attention of
383:
371:
294:
146:
38:
192:
379:
367:
290:
248:
237:
218:
173:
402:
338:
256:
47:
17:
310:
362:
252:
213:
268:
162:
318:
397:
333:
327:
323:
306:
414:
387:
350:
298:
260:
185:
156:
until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
131:
313:
on this micro-issue, which has pointlessly now spiraled into a WikiProject alert
138:
109:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
356:
You may not have read my latest comment at the talk page so I'll post it here:
212:
Hi there SMcCandlish! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the
236:
to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at
25:
141:, which you created or to which you contributed, should be
330:. Or are we talking about a different comment? ā
154:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/John Parris
137:A discussion has begun about whether the article
8:
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
7:
24:
152:The article will be discussed at
275:
199:
130:
117:
29:
374:) 22:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
1:
415:23:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
388:23:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
351:23:08, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
299:22:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
261:05:26, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
186:11:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
431:
273:
197:
115:
324:assumptive of bad faith
376:
322:editor behavior isn't
358:
126:Responded at the AfD.
42:of past discussions.
18:User talk:SMcCandlish
284:By mutual agreement.
380:Christopher Connor
368:Christopher Connor
291:Christopher Connor
269:Armbrust talk page
249:MessageDeliveryBot
219:a matching program
412:
348:
264:
100:
99:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
422:
413:
407:
406:
349:
343:
342:
285:
279:
278:
246:
230:list of adopters
209:
203:
202:
182:
176:
168:
165:
134:
127:
121:
120:
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
430:
429:
425:
424:
423:
421:
420:
419:
401:
395:
337:
331:
286:
283:
281:
276:
272:
217:myself through
210:
207:
205:
200:
196:
191:An update from
180:
174:
166:
163:
147:deletion policy
135:
128:
125:
123:
118:
114:
105:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
428:
426:
418:
417:
354:
353:
319:people like me
316:
274:
271:
266:
198:
195:
189:
129:
116:
113:
108:Nomination of
106:
104:
101:
98:
97:
92:
87:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
427:
416:
410:
404:
400:
399:
392:
391:
390:
389:
385:
381:
375:
373:
369:
364:
363:Clive Everton
357:
352:
346:
340:
336:
335:
329:
325:
320:
314:
312:
308:
303:
302:
301:
300:
296:
292:
270:
267:
265:
262:
258:
254:
251:on behalf of
250:
247:Delivered by
244:
241:
239:
233:
231:
226:
224:
221:, but I need
220:
215:
194:
190:
188:
187:
183:
177:
171:
170:
169:
157:
155:
150:
148:
144:
140:
133:
111:
107:
102:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
396:
377:
359:
355:
332:
311:edit-warring
287:
245:
242:
234:
227:
222:
211:
193:adopt a user
161:
160:
158:
151:
136:
112:for deletion
103:October 2010
78:
43:
37:
398:SMcCandlish
334:SMcCandlish
307:tendentious
139:John Parris
110:John Parris
36:This is an
238:the survey
95:ArchiveĀ 50
90:ArchiveĀ 49
85:ArchiveĀ 48
79:ArchiveĀ 47
73:ArchiveĀ 46
68:ArchiveĀ 45
60:ArchiveĀ 40
328:an attack
409:Contribs
345:Contribs
280:Resolved
253:Netalarm
204:Resolved
181:contribs
122:Resolved
228:On the
164:Phantom
143:deleted
39:archive
405:Ź(Ł)Ė
403:Talkā
341:Ź(Ł)Ė
339:Talkā
259:) at
214:alarm
167:Steve
16:<
384:talk
372:talk
326:nor
309:and
295:talk
257:talk
223:your
175:talk
315:and
386:)
297:)
282:ā
206:ā
184:\
149:.
124:ā
64:ā
411:.
382:(
370:(
347:.
293:(
263:.
255:(
178:|
172:/
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
