User talk:Dalit Llama

Welcome!

Hello, Dalit Llama! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking

if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dabomb87 (talk) 04:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content
Miscellaneous
User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

What policy are you upholding?

Hello. I can't help but notice that you have been following me around, removing the formatting that I've added to various articles, in which one additional blank line is added between the end of the external links and the navboxes so that they are not uncomfortably close together. Your edit summary when you do this says "Don't add ugly blanks", but I wonder, what policy do you believe you are upholding when you do this -- not a guideline, such as WP:MOS, which is not binding, but a Wikipedia policy? Because it appears to me that your actions are based primarily in WP:IDONTLIKEIT rather than in any policy. Further, while I add the single-line spacer to articles that I have otherwise edited, sometimes extensively, you're just tagging along after me and removing them, without editing the article either beforehand or afterwards, which makes your edits seems somewhat WP:POINTY and directed at me personally. Is there some policy-based explanation for your actions? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You ignore those others when they ask you why you make non-policy changes to layout. I think it best when I ignore you when you ask why I fix it. Dalit Llama (talk) 17:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I ignore noone. I give everyone who asks my specific reasoning for my actions. There may be disagreement, but there is dialogue. So, please tell me what policy you are upholding in making these edits. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The policy that says consensus has generated norms. Dalit Llama (talk) 22:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there's a policy that says that, but I admit I could be wrong -- could you post a diff to it please? Oh, and it is considered very uncollegial to continue contentuous behavior that is under discussion while it is being discussed. I note that you have again gone through my edit history and reverted the spacers I added in a dozen articles or more. I ask that you please stop doing that while this is under discussion, and also point out that unless you are undoing vandalism or edits which violate Wikipedia policy, going through another editor's contribs in that manner is not a supported behavior. Since my edits are not vandalism, and are suitable under Wikipedia's policies, you really shouldn't be doing that. I would ask that you stop. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:32, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, from September 21 until the current moment, you have made 124 edits, 90 of which have been to revert edits of mine -- that's 76% of your edits, which indicates a rather unhealthy focus on your part. I would suggest that you re-direct your efforts to editing articles instead of following me and undoing my legitimate edits. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(You posted this on my talk page, but I would prefer to keep the discussion together in one place.)

More interesting question than asking me why I remove your blanks is ask you why you add them, after so many people ask you to stop. Dalit Llama (talk) 21:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I add them because they significantly improve the readability of that section of the articles, as I have explained to the three or four peoplel who have inquired about them. My actions are firmly within the ambit of the basic Wikipedia policy WP:IAR, since they improve the article. Now, since I have been good enough to answer your question, could you please answer mine: What policy are you upholding when you remove them with the edit summary "Don't add ugly blanks"? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since this dispute is still under discussion, why are you continuing to follow my edits and removing them? You've done three or four within the last few minutes. I ask you to stop doing so while we discuss this. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:50, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So courteous to stop adding ugly blanks while under discussion for Ken. Dalit Llama (talk) 21:53, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(You posted this on my talk page, but I would prefer to keep the discussion together in one place.)

Because don't want people to see acts being exposed. Delete everything critical on your Discussion. Dalit Llama (talk) 21:50, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise?

How about this -- I'll undo all the reverts you've made of my improvements to these articles, and when I've finished, we'll discuss the matter. While the discussion is ongoing, I will not add spaces and you will not remove them. How's that? It returns us to the status quo ante while we talk? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of restore ugly blanks you should comply with Wiki rules. Dalit Llama (talk) 21:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't abandoned account blocked for adding ugly blanks? Should just stop. Dalit Llama (talk) 22:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If by "abandoned account" you mean User:Before My Ken or User:Between My Ken, no they were not.

OK, here's one last attempt at a compromise: I will not add any more spacer, and you will stop removing them, but in return for this, you must tell me what Wikipedia policy you believe you are upholding by removing my spacers. Recall that I have justified my actions by the policy WP:IAR, which says that if a rule gets in the way of improving the encyclopedia, it can be ignored. Also bear in mind that the Manual of Style is not a policy, it's a guideline. So, what policy are you acting under? Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You say blanks are ignoring rules. I say they are ugly. Not an improvement. Rules say they don't belong. IAR is rare not every article you edit. Rules exist for consistency and good looks not ignore. Blocked for adding ugly blanks. Stop denying it. Discussion page of abandoned account shows it. Don't be a liar. Dalit Llama (talk) 22:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Since you don't provide diffs, I'm not sure what you are referring to, but my block logs [1], [2] are quite clear and definitive: I was never blocked for "adding ugly spacers". You may be referring to interactions I had with an editor named User:Miami33139, who took an absolutist position very similar to yours, and who followed me around (just as you are doing) reverting my edits. This editor also acted similarly with other editors, particularly User:Tothwolf, and for this he was sanctioned by ArbCom, after which he disappeared. I'm certain that you don't want this to happen to you, so you really need to discuss this with me, not by waving your hand and blowing me off, but by telling me what specific policy allows you to go through my edits and revert them when they are not against policy and improve the articles. It's really not sufficient for you to say they are "ugly", you need to justify your actions. I ask that you do so now. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What rules I acting under: Rules derive their power to compel not from being written down on a page labeled "guideline" or "policy", but from being a reflection of the shared opinions and practices of many editors. (See also Wikipedia:Consensus.), What_"Ignore_all_rules"_means#What_.22Ignore_all_rules.22_means Wikipedia:What_"Ignore_all_rules"_means#What_.22Ignore_all_rules.22_does_not_mean Dalit Llama (talk) 22:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a consensus that adding some space -- exactly equivalent to the space added by the system before a major heading to separate the heading from the text above it -- between the end of the External links and the navboxes in an article is not allowed? I was unaware of that, could you please provide a diff pointing to that discussion? Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rules that you say are ignoring. Those ones. Dalit Llama (talk) 22:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, there's been no specific discussion about the specific spaces I'm adding, just a general rule in the MoS, and on that basis you're following me around, reverting my edits, so that 119 of your past 160 edits since September 21 (75%) have been about this particular fixation on me? Don't you think your time on Wikipedia would be better spent editing articles and making some substantive improvements to the encyclopedia? Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

Please stop stalking User:Beyond My Ken. It is pretty obvious that your only current purpose on Wikipedia is to undo their edits in one single little area: the blank line between external link sections and navigation boxes. That is very silly. I will grant you that it takes to to edit-war, but you will have to grant that Beyond My Ken sought your talk page, tried to engage you in discussion, proposed a compromise, explained their edits--and that all you did in return was point to IAR without even explaining what rule should be ignored or what precedent you had for your edits. The only rationale you offered for the edit in the first place was "don't add ugly blanks." Now, there are plenty of articles that do have that blank line--this FA, Hillsboro, Oregon, has it. That's a pretty good indication of consensus and considering the amount of article where you removed this helpful line, don't be surprised if someone (me, for instance) reverts all of them using rollback, considering that it's disruptive.

The bottom line is this: you are doing nothing but following Beyond My Ken around and reverting their work without offering a decent explanation. That is disruptive, to say the least. If you do it again, I will have no choice but to block you temporarily to prevent further disruption. I hope it won't have to go that far--certainly there are better things you can do with your time, as there are better things that I can do with mine. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are mistaken. Hillsboro, Oregon not have ugly blanks above navboxes. All rules about style, space, and comments say to not make blanks. Mr. Ken has personal admin to call on so I leave him alone. I hope he stop making blanks. I hope he stop replacing bot stubs. I hope he stop manually resize images. I hope he stop removing headers to place as footer. All these thing are his personal style against well documented rules and consensus. Don't defend that. Dalit Llama (talk) 19:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This concerns you

[3] Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

Afolabi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

was linked to Yoruba

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thank you bot. Dalit Llama (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

spacing after period/full stop

I noticed your recent edits to Love in the Ruins which fixed one typo and removed all the second spaces after the periods. Just thought I would let you know that, as noted in MOS:PUNCTSPACE, "The number of spaces following the terminal punctuation of a sentence in the wiki markup makes no difference on Wikipedia because the MediaWiki software condenses any number of spaces to just one when rendering the page (see Sentence spacing). For this reason, editors may use any spacing style they prefer on Wikipedia. Multiple spacing styles may coexist in the same article, and adding or removing a double space is sometimes used as a dummy edit." So, basically, you're wasting your time (though why you thought that was a productive use of time in the first place is beyond me), time that could be better used fixing typos like the misplaced quotation mark you spotted. I'd also request that you use the edit summary feature as a courtesy to other editors. Happy editing. -- InspectorTiger (talk) 01:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit moved navbox above categories which is productive. Double space took zero time. Unwasted as does not exist. It is side effect. Dalit Llama (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Beckwith

Hello. Just letting you know that I removed the WP:PROD on this as the reason for it wasn't clear. If you think it should still be deleted, please take it to WP:AFD. Both entries seem to meet MOS:DABRL/MOS:DABMENTION. Please also inform the creator if you wish to delete an article. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 07:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

hi thanks for talking on the ani. i guess nothing happened though it got closed nobody really cared. is that how it is here? Bouket (talk) 06:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That my experience. Dalit Llama (talk) 17:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

so what do we do just keep editing and hope that these people with weird egos dont mess it up? Bouket (talk) 21:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your invitation to participate in a Wikimedia-approved survey in online behavior.

Hello, my name is Michael Tsikerdekis [4], currently involved as a student in full time academic research at Masaryk University. I am writing to you to kindly invite you to participate in an online survey about interface and online collaboration on Wikipedia. The survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee.

I am contacting you because you were randomly selected from a list of active editors. The survey should take about 7 to 10 minutes to complete, and it is very straightforward.

Wikipedia is an open project by nature. Let’s create new knowledge for everyone! :-)

To take part in the survey please follow the link: www.urcity.com/survey/index.php?user=19957281.

Best Regards, --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 11:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The results from the research will become available online for everyone and will be published in an open access journal.

Roxx Gang

Hi, I never heard of Roxx Gang before so it was fun trying to find info on them. I left some feedback here - I hope this helps. Cheers! Gongshow ^Talk 07:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		Research Participation Barnstar
		For your participation in the survey for Anonymity and conformity on the internet. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 21:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clever

I like your user name. It is one of the more amusing ones I have seen.
Cheers, Varlaam (talk) 01:42, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Square foot gardening

Hello, I noticed your interest in horticulture/gardening related topics. Check out WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening's Collaboration of the Month, and feel free to contribute to the project and post articles for collaboration consideration! Northamerica1000^(talk) 22:25, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TriBeCa move discussion

When you said "YES camelcase or not whatever", did you mean to support the proposal to move it back to its former title of "TriBeCa"? p b p 01:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TriBeCa Or Tribeca. Dalit Llama (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shit on Deborah's Desk listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Shit on Deborah's Desk. Since you had some involvement with the Shit on Deborah's Desk redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Goveganplease (talk) 01:02, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]