User talk:Adamdaley/Archives/2018/August

Military Importance in WP:MILHIST
Hi Adamdaley, I am responding to the discussion on ' talk page. You are correct in saying that 'importance' ratings are "unnecessary" on MilHist articles. That is not the same however, as their being prohibited or disallowed, and one does come across them occasionally. It was useful of you to add an importance rating to the Biography Project and thanks for that. However, adding or removing them from MilHist articles serves no purpose, and may cause harm; for example, an article creator may have added them so they can track the relative importance of articles they have created. There may be other reasons for adding this 'null-code' (personally I think that "invalid code" was an overly strong expression) which I can't think of, but in any event it is usually best to leave undisturbed things causing no harm.

That said, there is usually little harm in tidying up such things. I have a tendency to remove the etc bits when I come across them; a pointless activity, but it pleases me. However, whenever I make a change which is not, IMO, vital to the project and someone reverts it I at least let it go, and more usually apologise. It is not a case of being right, assuming that such a thing can be established, as of everyone getting along on the project, and of freeing my time up to get on with what is important. I hope that this addresses, so far as I can from my position of relative inexperience, the concerns you and 47thPennVols had.

Skimming through the exchange you had on their talk page, it seems to me that you were focusing on the importance tag being in the "wrong" place. As I am sure you realise, you can add such a tag to another project without "moving" it.

In passing, can I congratulate you on the work you're getting through on MilHist. I find your commitment quite inspiring. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I was not in the argumentative as to what claims I was. As you can see by my userpage, I've been on WP:MILHIST a very long time. Secondly, I was hoping you'd see it in a neutral way and I appreciate that. I would like to continue typing but I know that my response needs to be drawn to a close. Adamdaley (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Adam. I hope that you don't mind if I chip in a last word. (I agree that this needs closing.) I was hesitant about commenting on editing by someone as experienced and active as you are and have been, but as both of you seemed to be waiting for my input, I felt that I needed to. You were both entirely civil, but I hoped that I might assist in closing the discussion so we can all move on. I'm pleased that I didn't manage to misphrase things so as to offend you, and thanks for letting me know that I haven't. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:44, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I am hoping that you and, can understand why I moved the importance. As I don't have a problem with you nor . I felt that it was in a better place in the WP:Biography rather than WP:MILHIST. If anything in the future you want to ask ... ask. I may not have all the answers but I'll definitely try my best. Adamdaley (talk) 10:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Will do. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:32, 29 August 2018 (UTC)