Talk:Building a personal MAA website: Difference between revisions
From BoyWiki
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.
- 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.
- 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)
- 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)
- ↑ "This article is far from being very professional, and does not belong on BoyWiki." User4 (talk) 13:14, 20 June 2015 (UTC)