Talk:The Holocaust in Poland/Archives/2023/October

Cited to dead link
This is probably the same author as above: Significantly, the only rebellions in Nazi camps were Jewish. Elinruby (talk) 14:02, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * The link isn't dead. DuncanHill (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC)


 * it went to a 404 page when I clicked it. Possibly it's since been repaired, in which case yay. Elinruby (talk) 21:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Oh well, someone else has removed it because it is twenty years old. DuncanHill (talk) 21:44, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Re reverts: Definition of "foundation"
It does not mean creation no matter who wants it to. Also please explain in what way the other rather innocuous copyedits you have objected to are "undesirable", Buidhe. Elinruby (talk) 14:40, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * To start with:
 * "European" != "Europe-wide" the latter word more clearly indicates the scope of the Holocaust
 * Removed red links to notable topics, in contravention of WP:REDLINK
 * You added duplicate links
 * Information removed without a reason
 * "Cleared the way for" does not imply intent imv, while "led to" can imply causality
 * (t &#183; c)  buidhe  17:44, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * 1) You think so?
 * 2) I removed a redlink! That does it, string me up right now!
 * 3) A duplicate link to a obscure concentration camp, way way down the page! Scratch the hanging, obviously I need to be burned at the stake!
 * 4) Arbitrary pause while I see what information I removed...aha, some vague WP: WEASEL. Why not just say "a little before" then rather than cramming in another badly-written clause
 * 5) Seriously? You really think that. OK. I refrain from comment.

You would have more success as an editor, Buidhe, if you were sometimes able to admit that your deathless prose can be improved. But I don't really care about these copyedits, even I think some of them are probably improvements. I asked you about "foundation". I think maybe golden suntan might be a good color, if you insist on talking makeup in a Holocaust article. I'm sorry Buidhe, I can't take this stuff seriously. Since the rain has cleared away the wildfire smoke, I am off to see about some crabgrass. Elinruby (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * string me up right now!, Scratch the hanging, obviously I need to be burned at the stake! -- what kind of discourse is this? this page is for discussing contents of the article, not user behaviour, especially in such charged language. if there are concerns about user behaviour, please use an appropriate noticeboard. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * been there done that. Apparently page ownership is a content problem. So here we are, reverting very minor copyedits. Reference errors are ok though, because it's Buidhe. Read the history. Elinruby (talk) 21:05, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * After an unsuccessful AE it's not appropriate to take the dispute to talk page pages and use such inflammatory language. It sounds more like bating rather than a good-faith content dispute. --K.e.coffman (talk) 21:10, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Does the above look like a good-faith content dispute? Does banishing all Poles, Belarusians, homosexuals and Roma seem like a good faith content dispute? I am not here to argue with you, or her, but the fact that we're reaching for such straws is amusing. Read the history. Reference errors... No problem. Sat around for days if not weeks before I fixed them this morning. But omg we *are* defending our redlinks tooth and nail. Read the history. My crabgrass is calling. Elinruby (talk) 21:18, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * PS - talk page is where they sent me. Of course they assumed that she would discuss in good faith, but such is Wikipedia. Elinruby (talk) 21:21, 10 June 2023 (UTC)