Contents

User talk:dcljr

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Discussion from 2021 and earlier can be found at User talk:dcljr/Archive.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Roman Catholic sex abuse cases/Archive 5 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Roman Catholic sex abuse cases/Archive 5 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 06:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Roman Catholic sex abuse cases/Archive 4 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Roman Catholic sex abuse cases/Archive 4 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 06:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You preposterously said you don't agree. This is not your site. Further you took credit for my editing. You will not be on this site long acting this way.Highwatermark1 (talk) 08:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Every editor is free to disagree with any other editor's contributions and either revert or otherwise change them (subject to certain restrictions). This is a wiki, after all. As for the idea that I "took credit" for your "editing", comparing your changes and mine after I reverted you, the only thing I see in common was my relinking of the name "Al Burton", which you had linked and my revert had unlinked. I clearly said in my edit summary for that specific change that I was relinking a name, which was supposed to allude to the fact that I had just removed the link in my previous edit. In any case, that hardly qualifies as taking credit for someone else's work. - dcljr (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, this user has been blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry. - dcljr (talk) 00:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated it for Article for deletion again since it's violation of WP:NOT was just wondering why didn't the merge go through as voted upon?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firefox version history (2nd nomination) 1keyhole (talk) 14:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is: because the way it was initially done was terrible. See in particular my first comment at Talk:History of Firefox#Merge version-history tables back to here (and the things I link to there [some of which you may have to track down in talk archives]). Regardless of where the content ended up, it needed to be cut down significantly, and no one was willing to actually do that. - dcljr (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you undo my title correction for "Love and the Novel"? I caught the rerun a couple of weeks ago on the Catchy Comedy channel (formerly DECADES) George Fergus (talk) 19:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Were you going off of the title shown on-screen in the episode itself or the one given in TV listings? Because it looks to me like the title in the TV listings is probably wrong. Other sources do not include the final word "Love" in the title, including IMDb, Metacritic, TV Guide, and even Getty Images. This latter source would seem to be the most reliable in this case, since its information almost certainly comes directly from the rights holder of the image in question, ABC Photo Archives, independently of any other source. - dcljr (talk) 01:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@George Fergus:? - dcljr (talk) 02:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]