This is an archive of past discussions with User:DankJae. 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.
Fair, made an error there when I added the table. But I added it with the clear intention of having the Tories and Reform there as it was disputed whether to have them in the infobox. Plus it be ludicrous to omit them based on votes for readers. The two parties still got a lot of votes.
Thanks for pointing it out, but don’t delete it. Would've preferred if you just changed the description rather than remove large parts of it. DankJae18:07, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello, DankJae. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:North Wales Society of the Blind, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Orphaned non-free image File:Reworld Waste black logo.svg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Reworld Waste black logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Maybe I'm just reading too much into things, but have I been annoying you lately? If I have I assure you it's unintentonal, and if there's anything you'd like to get off your chest please feel free to say it. I know I can be quite forthright on here, so I'd rather know if you think I need to rein it in!
@A.D.Hope, I am a bit peeved by going against the MOS so advertently, and if we divert from it, at minimum it should have consensus or long-acceptance. If your edit was reverted (especially without consensus) don't just add it back in please, it looked inconsiderate, especially for a major change. However, I didn't revert it initially, but raised it until others did. But we're not all perfect and I too make bad judgements.
All I'll say is that I've noticed you prioritising "officialness", such as WP:OFFICIALNAMES, and well I have to monitor that a lot in Wales as places are getting renamed now. If I make the "we don't use official names" at Snowdonia, I kinda have to stick to my word everywhere else (or get critiqued for it), (even if I'd prefer other names). Plus the lead and title not matching seems off imo.
I appreciate you being bold, I am probably too un-bold, to the point I'm reconsidering my approach. In the end, if we're in the same topic area, we're eventually gonna bump into each other at some point . I am now more busy than I used to so, I guess a bit more pressured to act. I still commend you for the amazing work you've done here! Kind regards. DankJae18:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I won't make a full defence of myself over at Big Ben, but given there were about ten months between my edits to the lead I hope you can see why I thought of them as two separate BRD 'events' rather than one continuous dispute. I can definitely see your point of view, though, and looking back I should have opened a discussion.
To be honest, I think I've only ever seen 'officialness' as a means to an end. There are times where the MOS does have the answer to an issue, as with Snowdonia, and times where it isn't quite as helpful. I'm generally wary of advocating for something simply because it's in the MOS or a policy, but a lot of the MOS and policy is good and worth advocating for when it is relevant to a particular dispute.
If anything I'm the opposite to you, in that I can be very bold and I'm trying to rein it in a bit! I'm also finding it helpful to remind myself that there's no rush on Wikipedia – there's a time where I'd have tried to force the issue of flags at Devon and Cornwall, for example, but now I'm happy to have that discussion as and when the opportunity arises.
Anyway, I appreciate your response and I'm glad we seem to have been able to talk things through. As you say, we find ourselves editing the same topics a lot, and I do respect you as an editor and wouldn't want to fall out. Thanks for the kind words, and don't hesitate to say if you think I'm getting a bit too bold! All the best, A.D.Hope (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
