Talk:Building a personal MAA website: Difference between revisions

From BoyWiki
User4 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 23: Line 23:


::::::When I have proven you wrong in the past, you have gotten very angry at me, and accused me of "acting like a two-year-old child". Are you going to continue to resist constructive criticism, even if it is of a personal nature? [[User:User4|User4]] ([[User talk:User4|talk]]) 13:50, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
::::::When I have proven you wrong in the past, you have gotten very angry at me, and accused me of "acting like a two-year-old child". Are you going to continue to resist constructive criticism, even if it is of a personal nature? [[User:User4|User4]] ([[User talk:User4|talk]]) 13:50, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
::::::: Just following your advice on tightening up on what is acceptable<ref>[[Talk:Results_of_the_poll_on_what_people_find_physically_attractive_in_boys| "This article is far from being very professional, and does not belong on BoyWiki."]]  User4 (talk) 13:14, 20 June 2015 (UTC)</ref> I am been accused of being too lax in what I allow and as much as I would like to, I simply can't go and recode and fix every entry. People are going to have to start putting in the work and not simply dumping stuff on BoyWiki. --[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] ([[User talk:Etenne|talk]]) 14:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
{{reflist}}

Revision as of 14:08, 20 June 2015

Proposed for deletion

This entry it just too big of a mess and will never be fixable enough to be a useable article.

  • 4. No indication of importance (Individuals, organizations, events)--Etenne (talk) 13:17, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • 7 Abandoned entry, article, or draft left incomplete having structural issues that make it unreadable.
RE: 7 Abandoned entry, article, or draft left incomplete having structural issues that make it unreadable.
Feel free to fix it. You're the expert on wiki markup, aren't you? This article has good content. But you would delete it because you won't take a few minutes to fix the formatting? I am simply amazed'. User4 (talk) 13:35, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
It is not my entry and I have no interest in this subject. --Etenne (talk) 13:37, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Then only articles that you have an interest in should appear on BoyWiki?
What a very strange attitude to have as the one in charge of BoyWiki!
Also: This entry it just too big of a mess and will never be fixable enough to be a useable article.
That is an absurd statement, and is not factually correct. User4 (talk) 13:40, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Then prove me wrong and FIX IT!--Etenne (talk) 13:45, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
When I have proven you wrong in the past, you have gotten very angry at me, and accused me of "acting like a two-year-old child". Are you going to continue to resist constructive criticism, even if it is of a personal nature? User4 (talk) 13:50, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Just following your advice on tightening up on what is acceptable[1] I am been accused of being too lax in what I allow and as much as I would like to, I simply can't go and recode and fix every entry. People are going to have to start putting in the work and not simply dumping stuff on BoyWiki. --Etenne (talk) 14:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)