User talk:JScribner
VanTucky 22:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC) added welcome template. Removed for cleanliness JScribner 04:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Maintenance tags
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.--Crossmr (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Tags were removed because tagger failed to document why the tag was added and provided no links to guide article editors (personal bias displayed in the edit summary was additionally unhelpful). JScribner (talk) 04:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- There was no personal bias in the edit summary, I'll remind you to read WP:NPA and keep your comments to the articles and their content and not the contributors. Tags like "unreferenced" don't need any further explanation, while you may have disagreed with the NPOV tag, the unreferenced tag is very clear and self-explanatory and removing it was improper.--Crossmr (talk) 09:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Your edit summary reads "tagging for multiple issues. I can't believe this is even here. Yet another webcomic without a shred of established notability, no sources, and little more than a giant character list.." I post this here to let others reviewing this talk page make their own determination. In the future, might I suggest you try "tagging for multiple issues. lack of independent or significant references raises concerns of notability, neutrality" JScribner (talk) 14:53, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Which is a factually correct and a common complaint on wikipedia. Webcomics are often added here as a form of advertising and many creators seem to think as soon as they get a half dozen strips under their belt they can set up a page here, and use it as a pseudo fan page. So yes it was "yet another webcomic" that displayed those issues. If you read that as some kind of bias, that is unfortunate, but I treat every unsourced article exactly the same regardless of subject.--Crossmr (talk) 17:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Your edit summary reads "tagging for multiple issues. I can't believe this is even here. Yet another webcomic without a shred of established notability, no sources, and little more than a giant character list.." I post this here to let others reviewing this talk page make their own determination. In the future, might I suggest you try "tagging for multiple issues. lack of independent or significant references raises concerns of notability, neutrality" JScribner (talk) 14:53, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- There was no personal bias in the edit summary, I'll remind you to read WP:NPA and keep your comments to the articles and their content and not the contributors. Tags like "unreferenced" don't need any further explanation, while you may have disagreed with the NPOV tag, the unreferenced tag is very clear and self-explanatory and removing it was improper.--Crossmr (talk) 09:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)