User talk:Jonhan/Archive 2

Re: Mistake?

It was deliberate as I find the column fairly useless as the current record is already mentioned at least two places on any given page (infobox and above table) and should someone want to know the exact record before a fight (can't really see why; it's the specific wins and losses which counts -- and losses are already easily spotted) they're free to count. There was some discussion after one user started adding the column (to my knowledge we didn't really use it before then) and while there wasn't any solid consensus formed or anything the users who added it agreed and started removing them again. Besides just the usefulness there's also the issue of the tables getting cramped because a lack of space (as you might have noticed: compare Fedor Emelianenko to Joe Warren (fighter) (here the record is listed, but better integrated), Jung Chan Sung or Mizuto Hirota (though I'm viewing them with a somewhat high resolution: they might all look just as bad if you're not. Suggestions for improvements welcome as the later three is my suggestion(s) for how the tables should be)). If you feel strongly one way or the other re. the record-column feel free to bring it up at WT:MMA though :) --aktsu ^(t / c) 08:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might have been on a talkpage or user-talkpage so you're probably better of just starting a new one. I just happened to see it and agreed, so when I was adding the fight which required me to update the record anyway I just removed it. Any thought on listing it in the "result"-column as at Joe Warren (fighter)? I'm not opposed to it as long as it doesn't unnccessary clutter the table. --aktsu ^(t / c) 10:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's an interesting thing to bring up too, the Joe Warren page's makeup, I may as well start a topic on it in the mma project page. Jonhan (talk) 10:32, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I wasn't even around back then :) Pretty sure it was on an user's talkpage. Probably a good idea to bring it up. We have quite a few different record-tables so a consensus on which to use would probably be good. --aktsu ^(t / c) 10:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

I understand you may be frustrated, but comments like this are not constructive and are a violation of WP:CIVIL. Please try to figure out how to solve your disputes in a more constructive manner. Toddst1 (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By all means not haha. Dumb was a bit harsh (but true nonetheless). Jonhan (talk) 21:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In which you decided to keep you incivility, and you are trying your best to claim you words are more powerful that a reliable source. You are the one having problems here, not me. By problems, I mean the understanding of any procedures requiring proof. You thought you can accuse anyone and anything without proof, and the questioned always have to entertain you no matter how your question is unsupported by anything. Good try, but it is obviously a very demanding and uncivil type of thinking. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 15:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]