User talk:Thegoldengen
October 2024
[edit]
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 19:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did leave a message on your talk page when you previously reverted this added information. You responded rudely without any real explanation but with unconstructive critics. After realizing that many people feel you are rude and are deleting or reverting many things that shouldn't be, and with many open disputes I figured I would try again. Thank you for finally being kind, actually leaving a reason as to why you are reverting what YOU feel should be reverted. If we need to open a dispute resolution on this topic, maybe we should. Especially with so many people feeling that the information I am trying to contribute is needed and necessary. Thanks Thegoldengen (talk) 19:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has basic standards for inclusion. Explaining these to you is not 'rude' or 'unconstructive'. On the other hand, ignoring those standards to instead edit war to try to force in your additions over the objections of others is 'unconstructive'. Making personal attacks on me is not a substitute for following Wikipedia's policies. MrOllie (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly. Wikipedia has basic standards, standards to which you aren't following. These aren't rude, YOU are rude. By not saying anything once you decided to revert what I added, I literally had to seek you out to ask why. Never should have been a thing. If you felt the need to revert you should leave a reason as to why right here on this talk page as you did the second time I tried to add something. You didn't feel this was necessary because it is what YOU want. You never once explained anything to me as you reverted literally anything I added without any sort of explanation, just because you deemed it necessary. I haven't started an "edit war" in fact anyone who were to look at your personal talk page would see the bullying that you do on many different subjects, and insist that you yourself are wikipedia and anything and everything you deem worthy is only what should be added to any page. I haven't made any personal attacks but instead said we should probably get someone with some sort of authority on the issue as you and I will not see eye to eye on this. You may have bullied many people on this page about a color list, but you won't bully me. If you feel like taking some sort of offense that is completely on you, and you alone. I believe I have already started a dispute resolution on this very matter. Thegoldengen (talk) 03:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- More personal attacks, disappointing. MrOllie (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Facts are personal attacks? I'm sorry you are so sensitive especially when I'm asking basic questions and you are the one being rude and bullying others. I refuse to allow you to turn the tables back this way. Everything has been documented and as I said I've already contacted an Admin about you and about the pages you are reverting without any sort of explanation or response. I don't think there is really any more for us to say to each other until the Admin gets involved. Thegoldengen (talk) 16:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- More personal attacks, disappointing. MrOllie (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly. Wikipedia has basic standards, standards to which you aren't following. These aren't rude, YOU are rude. By not saying anything once you decided to revert what I added, I literally had to seek you out to ask why. Never should have been a thing. If you felt the need to revert you should leave a reason as to why right here on this talk page as you did the second time I tried to add something. You didn't feel this was necessary because it is what YOU want. You never once explained anything to me as you reverted literally anything I added without any sort of explanation, just because you deemed it necessary. I haven't started an "edit war" in fact anyone who were to look at your personal talk page would see the bullying that you do on many different subjects, and insist that you yourself are wikipedia and anything and everything you deem worthy is only what should be added to any page. I haven't made any personal attacks but instead said we should probably get someone with some sort of authority on the issue as you and I will not see eye to eye on this. You may have bullied many people on this page about a color list, but you won't bully me. If you feel like taking some sort of offense that is completely on you, and you alone. I believe I have already started a dispute resolution on this very matter. Thegoldengen (talk) 03:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has basic standards for inclusion. Explaining these to you is not 'rude' or 'unconstructive'. On the other hand, ignoring those standards to instead edit war to try to force in your additions over the objections of others is 'unconstructive'. Making personal attacks on me is not a substitute for following Wikipedia's policies. MrOllie (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Re: Sharpie
[edit]Hi there, I saw your message. I see why you added all of the sharpie colors, and perhaps there could be a use for an article for List of Sharpie colors, along the lines of List of Crayola crayon colors, if there are enough high-quality reliable sources. It seems a bit trivial to be included in the main Sharpie page, since the brand/company are so much more than any individual color. Further, the website you cited doesn't seem the most reliable, since it didn't have a code for the color, and seems more of a fan website than a reliable source. There have also been a few discussions about whether to include the colors or not - please see Talk:Sharpie (marker) for the talk page of the article, where you can see the discussions. So that seems to be why the information was removed, although I can see why you wanted to include them in the first place. Does that make sense? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response! I believe what you are saying definitely makes sense. I am also understanding you to be saying that the chart I am trying to add to the main Sharpie page could be useful on a different page like List of Sharpie Colors with enough reliable sources? I can most definitely get that together! After reviewing the talk page of the sharpie page, I saw that many people were wanting this color chart and thought I would create it. =/ The page list of crayola crayon colors is pretty much my vision for a page like list of sharpie colors. With your okay I would love to start on that today! Thegoldengen (talk) 18:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- The tricky part might be finding a reliable source, both in terms of the years used, as well as the hexadecimal color. Check out the page for reliable sources, and how a fan page might not be good enough for verification purposes. Ideally there would be a book, or a scholarly paper, that has all of the colors. Just be aware that there's a chance that source doesn't exist, and if that's the case, then the color list doesn't really have a place on Wikipedia. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)