User talk:Reisio
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Wikibreaking until admins don't block you for ignoring invalid policies. |
/Archive1
/Archive2
/Archive3
/Commons:Archive1
[edit] Linux templates
These can't currently be speedily deleted without further work as they have incoming links, and another template depends on them. It might be useful to delete that other template and move this one over, but the ones you nominated are not currently redundant. Please use WP:TFD if you think this issue needs to be addressed instead of attempting speedy deletion again and again (you already did so in March). Kusma (talk) 16:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah I did so in March, when there was no dependency, and you guys didn't do anything. If you want me to undepend the other and orphan it I guess I can do that. Then maybe one of you admins will do your job? I guess we'll see. ¦ Reisio (talk) 05:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
As I found out that the templates were kept at TFD (somebody just posted that on your talk page), please don't do that without previous consensus at Talk:Linux and/or Talk:Linux kernel. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 05:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- The template you tagged in March 2009 was deleted on April 13 and then undeleted on May 20 when I untangled the template mess, see the log and User talk:Night Gyr#Template:Latest stable software release/Linux. There certainly was a dependency on the template when you tagged it in March; when it was deleted it broke the infoboxes for both Linux and Linux kernel. As for orphaning them, that won't be possible without removing the infoboxes from both articles completely, which you certainly don't have consensus for.
Removing my previous comments [1] does not make them any less valid and in fact doing so only reinforces my original concerns over your motivations for trying to get these templates deleted. --Tothwolf (talk) 11:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't need consensus to replace one utterly duplicate template with another, that is the whole reason it's a criterion for speedy deletion. ¦ Reisio (talk) 18:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Reisio, you really should take the templates to WP:TFD if you are so determined that they need to be deleted. It is extremely unlikely that an administrator will delete them with such disagreement. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 03:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
There is nothing stopping you from nominating them again if you believe consensus will change, but at this stage trying to get them deleted goes against consensus. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 03:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- Really there isn't? :p It's not against consensus — did you even look at that TFD? If you go by the tally it was 3 to 2 in favor of deleting... out of a whopping five voices. :p ¦ Reisio (talk) 22:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are talking about this, it was closed as keep by an administrator. Consensus is not determined by votes, and the administrator closed it as he believed the consensus wasto keep it. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 23:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- You speak for User:JPG-GR? :p (even if you do, I don't think you really want to respond this question) ¦ Reisio (talk) 00:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Your editing of eeePC article
I happened to notice that you had removed a table of Operating system compatibilities on specific components of the eeePc. People have worked via trial and error to build that table and saved time and confusion for many. You justified it's removal as "useless and redundant", however that is far from true from my standpoint and many I have pointed to this page for help. I am at a loss as to why your blanking of that section wasn't reported as vandalism. If you feel so strongly you need to delete this table again, please use the discussion section to debate it. --76.121.89.168 (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
