Talk:Damian Pettigrew

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Biography assessment rating comment[edit]

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 08:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Fellinilexicon.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Fellinilexicon.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Wikiquote and not Commons[edit]

Quotations sections do not belong on Wikipedia WP:NOT WP:QUOTE they go on Wikiquote instead. Galleries do not belong on Wikipedia WP:NOT they go on Commons instead. Calling someone a problem editor is rude WP:CIVIL. 64.4.93.100 (talk) 21:24, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reinserting the perfectly legitimate photos you blanked and integrating them in the article as per Wiki Guidelines. Several editors have already discussed your actions as inept (see comments below). No doubt you know who they are yet you persist in bulldozing your way through Wikipedia when obtaining consensus would be the intelligent move to make. Please spare us your hypocrisy about civility: the record shows you were blocked for 72 hours for edit warring, the definition of problem editing. --Jumbolino (talk) 10:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I posted to seek consensus and when you didn't answer I made the edit according to WP:NOT. Please spare us your continued rudeness WP:CIVIL. 64.4.93.100 (talk) 13:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked for 72 hours: spare us your excuses tout court. Defining your interpretation of Wikipedia:NOTGALLERY at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) would be helpful. --Jumbolino (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was blocked for not discussing so I am discussing but you are just being rude so maybe you should be blocked. That would be helpful. 64.4.93.100 (talk) 13:27, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your pride is hurt, nothing more than that. As I say, the debate continues here Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Welcome to Wiki and please try to avoid edit warring. --Jumbolino (talk) 13:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Debate concerning wholesale deletions by 64.4.93.100[edit]

In reference to your statement above that you "don't agree with it, but community's opinion is all that matters and they have spoken by creating the policy", WP:QUOTE is not a policy, nor even a guideline. It is an "essay", which is Wikispeak for saying that it is someone or other's opinion, and they have decided to make a Wikipedia page stating that opinion. Some "essays" do reflect generally held consensus opinion, but many merely reflect the opinions of a small group of Wikipedia editors, and I see no reason whatever to think that this one has consensus behind it. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looking around, it seems to be widely respected, but I may look closer after some coffee. MOS issues are not my specialty, and I probably should have caught that. Not exactly batting 1000 here. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 08:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the immediate problem we have here is that an unregistered IP editor is using WP:QUOTE as a excuse for wholesale deletions to well over 250 articles - whilst having no intention to transfer those quotes to Wikiquote. This, in my opinion, smacks of sophisticated vandalism and is against the spirit of the community. As stated above, WP:QUOTE is not policy and some action is needed to stop what is basically vandalism. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 09:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree: removal of content without providing an alternative access route (by adding the quotes to Wikiquote and adding the linking template) is damage to the encyclopedia. I had a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies to see if it had perhaps a list of sections for a general biog article, but there's nothing like that and no mention of Quotations sections. I looked at 3 biographical FAs, chosen from names I recognised as quotable people from the list of FAs, and none have a quotes section, all have a list to Wikiquote (Ann Frank, Ernest Hemingway, Maya Angelou), so that non-scientific sample supports the suggestion that our best articles don't have a "Quotes" section. But removal without providing alternative access is damage tending towards vandalism, yes. PamD 09:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This probably needs someone with more MOS experience than I have, it really isn't my specialty at all and I never get into MOS issues. By the same token, WP:BRD is also just an essay but carries a lot of weight, I just don't know how much this quote essay has. I wouldn't go so far as to call it vandalism as it is inline with an essay that is at least considered by some to be valid. I'm guessing this would need a larger discussion, but not at ANI and instead an RFC, but I'm not sure where. Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) might be one idea. I suggest dropping the vandalism word at this stage, as to not be thought of poisoning the well. Ping me if you do, because I personally agree with you that quotes sections have value in many circumstances. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 09:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted a request for comments on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Many thanksfor your help.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Damian Pettigrew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Damian Pettigrew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Damian_Pettigrew&oldid=1204602276"