Talk:Lists of Michigan State Historic Sites

note

This is a needed list-article. An editor put a speedy-delete tag on it, which i removed. Please discuss here. That editor has a partially developed draft list to go here in a sandbox, i believe, which is popping up when i search "What links here" for places like the one in Alpena. The partially developed list should be moved to mainspace at this name, I believe. It is patent nonsense for the editor to assert that the topic of this list is patent nonsense. Just move out your work, dude. --do ncr am 01:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was notified that my removing the speedy tag was not proper, because i had started the article, and it was restored, by bot. Whatever. I pasted in the sandbox draft. Don't anyone claim i am trying to get credit or anything stupid. I acknowledge in edit summary and here that the work was done by Dudemanfellabra and others. I simply don't understand why editor Dudemanfellabra wouldn't just put this in mainspace, while he repeatedly has criticized me for putting lists or other articles into mainspace which were not highly polished. There's just disagreement. The drafted material is GFDL or whatever license, and it is valid to copy it sooner rather than later. It's needed material for working on disambiguation and linking in other ways. Don't claim this page is nonsense. --do ncr am 01:18, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace is meant for a certain user. I would appreciate it if you didn't butt into mine. I've been working on this list for upwards of two months, just to see you come in and fuck it up. There is an extensive edit history in my userspace that I planned on moving out when I finished out the list, but now the process of moving the information out will become all the more complicated because you seem to be so obsessed with disambiguation of pages that haven't even been created yet. God forbid you just left the link out of the dab page or redirected it to Michigan State Historic Preservation Office like I had done for every other list that I had created so far.

Now when a reader searches for that list, he will get this incomplete one for more than half of the counties in the state. Had you waited and left my userspace alone, this reader would have gotten a full list instead of a work in progress. Mainspace is not for empty lists; userspace is. I'm fine with you doing whatever the heck you want to do in your userspace or even in mainspace, but if I am working on something in my userspace, I expect you to leave it the hell alone. I can't delete this new article because any editor out there will defend the content, and to a certain extent I would too, but I was waiting until I finished the list to move it out. Thanks for sticking your nose in my business without even asking first. I appreciate that.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 02:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like to get involved in this sort of drama, but, Doncram, that sort of was a dick-move. While, yes, no one techincally owns the sandbox-article, it is courtesy to not touch another's userspace without permission. You wouldn't like it if someone scooped an article you'd been working on. I know I'd be pissed and would react the same way as Dudemanfellabra; though, lately, I use an offline copy in Notepad to work with instead of a sandbox, so the likelihood of that happening is almost nil. Mind you, such situations have occured where one can move another's finished article out of the userspace, but that has usually involved the author being inactive. I imagine this article will most likely need to be temporary deleted to preserve the page history when Dudemanfellabra finishes and decides to move the completed list. I'll also point out that the speedy tag for criterion G1 was probably not suitable, rather A3 would probably have been more appropriate. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 03:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and paste moves are not appropriate because they do not meet GFDL requirements, especially where there is more than one author. This article did not link to the source page in the edit summary - see WP:CWW. I've reverted. New content can be created at this title or a move requested. Station1 (talk) 06:39, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To others: i could not myself imagine a circumstance when i would do that, copying Dudemanfellabra's sandbox to mainspace. I also could not imagine any circumstance in which Dudemanfellabra should be trashing me up and down Wikipedia, over a long time now including calling my work "crap" in comment still showing at wt:NRHP, and I could not imagine that he would have any cause to call for a speedy delete upon a valid article which i had started. I had created a minimalist article to support other work i was doing, at a valid topic. It was necessary support for the mention of the Saint Ambrose Church in a dab page, which requires a page mentioning it. I did not invest any effort into this page, being aware of Dudeman working on the topic. Dudeman had the choice to add something more, or to do nothing, rather than label it nonsense. I first simply removed his speedy-delete, but found that was automatically restored. It was not my best move probably, but it seemed expedient to simply copy in material that would show the topic was not patent nonsense as Dudeman asserted. I returned now planning to remove that material, to revert it back to the previous version, and i see that has been done already. Thanks.

To Dudeman, don't be such a dick yourself. Lay off with the insults. U r not, nor am i, any kind of king here. --do ncr am 16:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]