 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:TRTX. 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. |
I archived the talk page, let me know if you think I did too much or anything...Bassg☢☢nist T C 16:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
RE: 18:03, March 10, 2008 revision
I removed songs from the "Leaked List" that have already been released since then. You undid my revision and your comment was: "Please review talk pages and previous edits regarding the content in this section."
Well, that's a mighty huge section to sort through; what's the relevant text you're referring to? I did find this, under the heading "Remove Nevermind songs from leaked list?":
"We can remove the songs from Nevermind, and include that the list previously included songs released between Feb 19th and present...", written by yourself.
Some songs in the leaked list were intentionally left out of that section (like the Nirvana songs), so what's the rationale for now saying to leave in certain _other_ songs (which have also already since been released); the ones I was trying to delete? swidly (talk) 19:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- The section is still currently being discussed, but at the moment the most agreed upon version only includes those songs which were not otherwise confirmed prior to the leak. For historical purposes those songs are still included. Nevermind was left off because those tracks in the album were already confirmed for release from a different source. TRTX (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- this makes no sense. many of the songs left on the list not only have been confirmed by other sources, they have been RELEASED. your statement is completely contradictory. please justify. 142.106.63.213 (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- The section is a record of those songs in the list that had not been confirmed at the time the list was discovered. Nevermind has been confirmed since RB launched. TRTX T / C 17:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- whats the difference? why is that important? This inclusion of irrelevant information unnecessarily bloats the article and makes wikipedia LESS USEFUL as a reference. either the information shouldnt be included at all because its not notable, or it should be maintained over time because it is. Since you obviously believe the information is notable, you should maintain it as necessary to remove out of date and unnotable information (such as listing songs that have long-since-been released as leaked information). 76.64.36.43 (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
You are correct, you do not have to put up with that. I left a message on the editor's page not to do that again, and clarified that this is blockable if it continues. I'm hopeful that the message will be the end of it. If it does happen again, WP:AIV is not really the place to report incivility. WP:ANI is better. --barneca (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- what other recourse do i have? he doesnt respond to my comments on the talk page, i do not wish to register (and i believe i shouldnt have to just to improve the site) and he summarily discounts any argument that doesnt agree with his own, regardless of how well-reasoned it is. its easy for him to play the victim because of the pages protect status, ie: he always gets his way. its bullshit (oops, i swore again, go ahead and block my ip! im on another computer again, feel free to block this one too since im such a wikipedia vandal) 76.64.36.43 (talk) 22:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- replying on talk. --barneca (talk) 22:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for making a report about 64.80.225.13 (talk · contribs · block log) on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If they continue to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you! It's not at all clear that the user you reported, user: 64.80.225.13 which is a shared IP, has any recent edits that are Vandalism. Please AGF. Toddst1 (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
