User talk:Richwales/Archives/2016-06

June 2016 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2016 News Hello everyone, welcome to the June 2016 GOCE newsletter. It's been a few months since we sent one out; we hope y'all haven't forgotten about the Guild! Your coordinators have been busy behind the scenes as usual, though real life has a habit of reducing our personal wiki-time. The May backlog reduction drive, the usual coordinating tasks and preparations for the June election are keeping us on our toes! May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's record-setting backlog reduction drive. Of the 29 people who signed up, 16 copyedited at least one article, 197 copyedits were recorded on the drive page, and the copyedit backlog fell below 1,500 for the first time! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz will occur from 12 June through 18 June; the themes will be video games and Asian geography. Coordinator elections: It's election time again; how quickly they seem to roll around! Nominations for the next tranche of Guild coordinators, who will serve a six-month term that begins at 00:01 UTC on 1 July and ends at 23:59 UTC on 31 December, opens at 00:01 UTC on 1 June and closes at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. Voting takes place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June. If you'd like to assist behind the scenes, please consider stepping forward; self-nominations are welcomed and encouraged. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; remember it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

I answered to you in my talk page. Urutine32 (talk) 10:19, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Discussion #2

Could you give an opinion about that? Thank you. Urutine32 (talk) 15:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I think you need to request outside dispute resolution. Go to Dispute Resolution Requests and pursue the steps listed under "article content". I strongly urge you to avoid any further edit warring or criticism of the other editor — confine your efforts to getting fresh input into the article from additional editors, whether they happen to agree with your side of the current dispute or not. If you and this other editor go back to battling each other, questioning each other's motives or rationality, all that is likely to accomplish is that both of you are likely to get blocked from editing. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 06:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't plan to restore the materials, but is dispute resolution really appropriate when the other editor has ceased to participate in discussion (he modified the article after my last message without answering) and given no reason at all for some of the materials he deleted? A "third opinion" would in fact be only the second... Urutine32 (talk) 07:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

You still need to try, and to make it clear to others that you are trying to get outside assistance to improve the content. If you make this effort, then either the article will eventually get improved, or else other people who haven't been deeply involved in trying to shape the article will realize what is going on and will take the necessary action. If you try to fight the other person yourself, then both of you (or, possibly, just you) are likely to be seen as being at fault for the problem. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 13:55, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Would you agree to give the third opinion yourself (especially for modern-day public opinion and contemporary era)? Urutine32 (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I have added the issue to Wikipedia:Third opinion. You can still take it yourself of course. Urutine32 (talk) 08:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)