User talk:Ecrz

October 2022
Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 18:52, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Why are you referencing a policy on lists of people and trying to apply it to an edit in a list of technical information about how a certain functionality is operated in different products? This is the 3rd time today that you've incorrectly referenced/applied policies. Additionally, you are 1 edit away from breaking the 3-revert-rule and, per Wikipedia's guidelines I have added the uw-3rr template to your profile page -Ecrz (talk) 02:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * It's the standard template message for this situation, it is written to accommodate all related situations. That you apparently disagree with the policies in question does not mean that I am incorrectly referencing them. - MrOllie (talk) 20:14, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, it would be helpful if you would read Help:Talk pages, particularly the parts about opening new threads and signing your posts. - MrOllie (talk) 20:17, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Did I say anything that indicates a disagreement with the policy? That is simply your (wrong) assumption on what I'm thinking. I am simply saying that a section named Lists of people talks about... lists of people! Can you point to something that indicates applicability to e.g., lists of products? something that indicates that each product in a list must have its own page? I don't see any indication that the section is generic and intended to be applied to every possible list --Ecrz (talk) 02:07, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:CSC. The list you were editing uses the first criterion listed there. In any case, per WP:BRD - you edited and then were reverted. Now you just gather support from others on the talk page - either to change the criterion or to establish that it shouldn't apply in this case for some reason. - MrOllie (talk) 02:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * (BRD) is an optional method of seeking consensus. This process is not mandated by Wikipedia policy and it's not the process I'm more familiar with (which is fixing/tagging first, then discussing and removing if appropriate), but I will give it a try in this case and see if it helps. My concern is that unless it is a hot topic, revert & discuss doesn't attract enough attention for a quality consensus, but a tag and a discussion has a better chance at getting sufficient attention.
 * I haven't had "talk page discussions" for a while and had forgotten about the signatures. Thank you for the reminder, I have added them. Ecrz (talk) 03:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)