User talk:HighKing/Archives/2010/November

Fact tag

High King, you have been editing articles to insert {{fact}} tags against any appearance of the term "British Isles". It is clear you are doing so because you object to the term rather than any matter of fact. This is disruptive and pointy. Change "British Isles" to "Britain and Ireland" if you have to, by all means, but please do not abuse the editorial citation process. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Deacon, are you aware of WP:BISE? If editors go around doing as you suggested they will incur the wrath of the community. {{fact}} tags are an ideal way of flagging misuse of the term. HK has been accused of many things in the past, but saying that requesting citations is pointy just takes the biscuit. Its anything but! have you looked at his contributions? 2 fact tags in a row, I grant you, but plenty of non-fact tag edits as well. give him (and the rest of us) a break!Fmph (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Deek, it sort of takes the biscuit that you'd come here to accuse me of being disruptive and pointy because I inserted a fact tag on Alex Woolf. I could have simply put a BISE template on the article and we could have discussed it at the BISE page. But because it was you (yes, I did know you'd created the article), I felt sure that there probably was a reference available, but perhaps hadn't been put into the article. That's called AGF. It's policy. Whereas, making accusations on my Talk page which are completely unjustified is a breach of said policy. Deleting the fact tag without providing a reference is closer to abusing the editorial citation process that any of my actions, and your actions may even open yourself to accusations of OWNership issues. As to the second fact tag, if you check closely, you'll see that I opened a discussion on the 1st November on the Talk page, but nobody responded, so I inserted a fact tag a week later on the 8th. You've now removed both fact tags without responding or correcting. The breaches and abuses of procedures and policies lies with you, not me. --HighKing (talk) 18:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, not getting dragged into an argument here. It is an abuse of citation tags and if I see it again it there will probably be a block. Just don't do it! All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Deek, my advice is for you to take it to the sanctions page at BISE if you have a problem with the way I inserted the fact tags. You've made an incredible accusation of bad faith and of disruptive editing. I see nothing wrong with having placed fact tags in those articles. Comments from watching admins welcome. --HighKing (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Westward Ho! (re-opened)

I know you're frustrated, but it's better to go over this article again. Thus I've re-opened the case at BISE. GoodDay (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Enough. I've sent this to AN/I --HighKing (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Okie Dokie. GoodDay (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Alright then, Earth/World is acceptable. But, I not gonna agree to Solar System, that's way too broad. GoodDay (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Although, if there's a reference.... :-) --HighKing (talk) 16:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

NASA would be very interested. GoodDay (talk) 16:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Although I hear the martians refer to Earth as "Humans...Beware!" and that's got an exclamation mark too. I can provide a reference if you can read martian?  :-) --HighKing (talk) 17:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Too spooky. GoodDay (talk) 21:55, 22 November 2010 (UTC)