User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2024/November
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Marchjuly. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
|
2023;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017;Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec |
Pitiless Bronze
That's basically a toss-up. The editor obviously has a conflict of interest (they didn't even try to hide it), so they would have to use the WP:AFC process if they were really determined to get an article into mainspace and would not have a right to bypass that at all — but since the only "reference" in it was the book's own publication details (not a notability-building source), which got wiped out when I removed the superfluous duplicate page headers from the top of the text, and the article is written entirely as a description of the book itself without any third-party analysis, it would also be a perfectly legitimate deletion candidate as well.
So either draftifying or AFD would be fine. Do whichever you feel comfortable with. Bearcat (talk) 13:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll draftify it to give them a chance to continue working on it if they want. I'll also add a COI template to their user page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Being friendly and helpful
|
Resolver |
| Advocating users like me to be more open-minded and to promote neutrality when dealing with article "talk" pages and editing. 9mm.trilla (talk) 03:35, 4 November 2024 (UTC) |
Question from PACIFIQUE IRASUBIZA (19:28, 4 November 2024)
hi --PACIFIQUE IRASUBIZA (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hello PACIFIQUE IRASUBIZA. Do you have a question about Wikipedia? -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Cleanup up pic sizes
Cleanup does not mean remove. If a pic is too big, and "px" is used to make it smaller, then cleanup means to use "upright" to make it a simlar size. We don't just remove attributes and leave nothing in their place. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Fyunck(click): The problem isn't necessarily that an image is too big or too small; it's that the fixed pixel size can create access problems for users using different devices from you or me because it forces them to see the images at the same size as you and me. The upright parameter allows scaling so that image can be seen at a size which is most appropriate for whatever type of device the reader is using. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- I agree and disagree. Most of the time the image is too large. On the tennis pages you changed, on my browser and phone the image was way too large after your removal. If you use "upright" it certainly shouldn't look too big in a normal monitor. So if you remove pixel size you have to compensate in some way so the pic is a normal size per the text and article. You can't just remove and expect everything will be ok. You have to do the work and not leave it to others. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)