User talk:Poucquerël

Italics
The style guidelines are quite clear about this, it doesn't matter what you or I personally think about this. Magazine titles, whether the original ones or the translated ones, are to be displayed in italics. Please restore the correct formatting in La Salamandre (magazine). Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 17:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please cite clearly what part of what page you cite. For me, only title of magazines, books, paintings, etc. are italicised. Not a literal translation given as an explanation, because it is not a magazine! Poucquerël (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC).
 * I am talking about La Salamandre (magazine), as said above. Here is another example: Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. (Note that although I have edited that article, I did not add any italics, they were already there). Standard procedure. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 18:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry I was not clear. I know - of course - what article you speak about. What I would like to know if which specific rule of style of Wikipedia makes you think you should act as you did? Poucquerël (talk) 18:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC).
 * Sorry, but that's not the way things are being done here. You removed the italics, so it is up to you to justify your edit. I see that on your first day here you are already editing templates, so you know your way around. Let me know where it is said that italics should not be used. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 18:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I justified it already, read above. I think italics should not be used because it is not the title of the magazine. Poucquerël (talk) 18:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC).
 * As I said, what you or I think is not of importance. And I'm not judging anything, all I said was that apparently you know your way around here and are not a newbie. I obviously assumed that you had edited enWP or another language WP before. Again, what we think is not a justification. There are style guidelines. --Randykitty (talk) 18:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I do know that there are style guidelines. I think they would agree with what I did - but I did not actually check. Now, you did say "style guidelines are quite clear about this" - so my question is: where is that said, please cite your source ? :) Poucquerël (talk) 18:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC).
 * I'll look this uo when I have a moment. One other thing: why is systematically replaced with   ? The former adapts the number of columns to the width of the window that a reader uses. If it is very narrow, you get 1 column, if it is very wide, you get 3, 4 or more. The latter forces 2 columns regardless of screen width. On a standard screen, both will result in two columns displayed. I really fail to see why that edit is reverted all the time, even though I explained it clearly in the edit summary. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 08:29, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Because, on my standard screen, your model makes three columns, and that's too much. You can maybe change the parameter? Otherwise, I like simple models and the other model suits me well, really. Poucquerël (talk) 08:44, 15 October 2013 (UTC).
 * Could you please check WP:ORDER again? When I look at it, it clearly specifies that "see also" goes before "references". As for "reflist", the template documentation specifies 20em for shortened references (not used here and results in more columns) and 30em for cases like this. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 09:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You're right about the "see also" section, so I will leave it before the references. About the template for references, the documentation is only information, not any form of rule. Poucquerël (talk) 09:11, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Instead of trying to impose your ideas here... You should rather try to add useful content to Wikipedia! Poucquerël (talk) 09:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC).
 * I think you are forgetting that you already reverted my correction, to it currently is in the wrong order. Perhaps you can self-revert? And concerning your last remark: perhaps instead of coming here to the English WP to impose your ideas, you could try being a bit more constructive? The template documentation means that on literally thousands of articles, "30em" is used. I didn't come up with that myself, I just imply it. Saying that on your screen it doesn't look good is not really a good argument to make it look bad on the screens of all other readers. --Randykitty (talk) 09:26, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * PS: the way the lead is worded now is grammatically incorrect. It implies that the magazine speaks French, which certainly is not what you intended to say. I suggest "Swiss magazine published in French". --Randykitty (talk) 09:28, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What you say about the "see also" section is wrong - I corrected it before your message so that the current version is actually not wrong. The template documentation also means that thousands of articles use "|2". Don't you think it would be more interesting to focus on something else for a while? Poucquerël (talk) 10:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC).
 * Ah, I see, your last "revert" only added the word "notes" to the reference section (even though there are no notes and only references). How about the "French-speaking magazine"? --Randykitty (talk) 11:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)