User talk:Jeh/Archives/2014/08

Windows 7 editions
Hi.

Please have a look at the discussion at Talk:Windows 7 editions. I think it is right up your alley.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Done

Only warning
WP:HOUNDING Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 05:15, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * One, I do not believe that anybody gets to use "only warning" for just one event; that is a phraseology that appears in the standard warning templates for the fourth warning. Two, checking out what you've done recently in related areas and reverting a change of a sort that you appeared to agree to not make without discussion is hardly "hounding." The "User contributions" tool is there to be used, and WP:HOUNDING does not mean your edits are immune to review by editors you've recently had disputes with, especially not if the edits are related.
 * In short, I do not accept this charge. If you think you have a case, by all means, please take it to dispute resolution.
 * Also: Only a few days ago I was a brand new addition to the anti-DE cabal that you imagine exists, and now i'm "hounding" you? Wow. I think you need to consider the possibility that a number of people consistently disagree with your ideas, not because of any cabal, but because your ideas are often just not that great. Jeh (talk) 06:58, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't feel like expounding upon the conduct issues - you're an experienced enough editor to know what is and isn't acceptable around here - but I'd like to explain why I moved the page. Unlike the page that is currently the subject of the discussion you mentioned, this page is not an article but a redirect. The primary criterion for determining the location of a redirect is search term likelihood, which in all cases that I can think of disfavours parenthetical disambiguation. If and when this page becomes an article again, it would perhaps be a different story. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 22:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you also give a rationale for restoring a double-redirect? Are you not familiar with WP:2R? Jeh (talk) 23:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Please check what I restored carefully. I reverted your edit to the talk page only as it was not a double redirect in the first place. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 00:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see. But... Talk pages of redirects aren't supposed to redirect to the talk page of the target page? That is not the result you get when you move a page. Jeh (talk) 07:47, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... well, I don't know of any consensus regarding talk page redirects specifically, but this discussion may be of interest in this regard: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:List of Carl Squared episodes Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 09:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * "Consensus" is clearly whatever the WP software does when you move a page and do not uncheck "move talk page also" (it is checked by default). Which is that the talk page is moved and is replaced by a redirect, just like the parent page. Jeh (talk) 09:25, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Eh? Since when does the software define consensus? That's a new one... should we let the developers know that there's no need to fix any bugs, since they clearly all represent consensus too? Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 09:29, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, please. You know perfectly well that it's the other way around. The software does it that way by default because consensus was established to do it that way.
 * And don't change things on my talk page. I consider that highly abusive. You put something on my page, you leave it there. If you want to retract a statement, you may use strikeout as provided in WP:TALK. Jeh (talk) 11:10, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually, I can change it, but you cannot per WP:TPO: "Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Striking text constitutes a change in meaning, and should only be done by the user who wrote it or someone acting at their explicit request." Since you apparently dislike the changes I made, I've simply removed the strikethrough instead. Again, do not put it back per WP:TPO. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 11:23, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Regarding the redirect: even if you are correct regarding the software, the corresponding page was not moved to the page it redirects to. Rather, it was simply redirected to a broader topic, so what the software does when a page is moved isn't applicable anyways, at least not directly. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 13:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I haven't had time (busy weekend) to detail my reasoning re. the redirect. Re the strikeout, ah, I see. If I strike it out it makes it looks as if you changed your mind. Ok, that's fair.


 * But I still don't want you (or anyone else, of course) bringing such an imperious attitude to my talk page. If you'd first said something like "hey old man (not an insult; it's a friendly greeting among hams), your change to my change on the "Hold-em" redirect feels to me like a bit of WP:HOUNDING. Furthermore you called it a "revert" but you actually changed it to something other than what it had been. Can you explain your reasoning?" I'd have responded in kind. I would even have looked closely at my first "revert" and realized that I'd goofed on it, and would have said that, and would have apologized. Bristle at me the way you've been doing (twice in one week), especially as your first approach for each complaint, and I won't be particularly motivated to turn the other cheek; you'll likely just get bristling back... in some form or other.  Jeh (talk) 21:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Done

What was the RAMAC price and capacity?
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Hard_disk_drive. Please help end the duologue on capacity and price of the IBM RAMAC Model 350 disk file. Thanks. Tom94022 (talk) 21:56, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry... I've not said anything because both sides seem completely unwilling to compromise on even the slightest detail. (And I am not interested in a point-by-point enumeration of just why I'm wrong about that. It's my impression.) So I don't think I can help. Jeh (talk) 00:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Sigh. I couldn't stand it any more! Jeh (talk) 03:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Done

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DATE (command)
Hello, Jeh

I hope I am not bothering you but Articles for deletion/DATE (command) badly needs more input from the community. It has been relisted twice before and in spite of me having tried to publicize it before, is still at the risk of being closed without a consensus. The reason that I am calling you is that last time, I've been told to invite people that are more connected to the matter.

Subject of the nomination is: "Wikipedia is not a manual and this article is written exactly like a man page."

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Good AFD IMO. Ok, I tried! Jeh (talk) 21:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done

VHS hyphens
Hallo Jeh,

I see your point about the hyphens you reverted. Those particular ones are really just a matter of style. I guess I was just on a roll! Also, I had another go at the other revert.. my prior edit was a careless attempt at making the parallel structure, and the new one should be more appropriate to the meaning. aruffo (talk) 06:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks for the reply. Your new edit looks good. Jeh (talk) 06:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Done