Talk:Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Evrik in topic Pages issues
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pages issues
edit@Bearcat: the propsed merger of content was discussed here, Talk:Congressional_Hispanic_Caucus#Proposed_merger. It was not accepted. In the last year, a number of edits have been made to clean up this work. I'm not really clear why it doesn't get approved. Thanks. --evrik (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- It wasn't my responsibility to have known that there was a previous merger proposal in any place other than here, or even to have gone gallivanting around to see if there might be. It's your job to make sure that the distinction is clarified here, not anybody else's job to read your mind to know that there was some discussion elsewhere. My job begins and ends with looking at this page, and noticing that all you did was to resubmit this for another kick at the can without making any changes after the last time it was rejected, and it's not my responsibility to have known anything about any other discussions that didn't take place on this page. And furthermore, that merger discussion features just one other participant besides you preemptively opposing it yourself as part of the process of even initiating it, so that in no way qualifies as any sort of "consensus" that I should take seriously either. "I opposed it myself right in the nomination, and got one other person to agree with me, so BOOYA!" is not how consensus works around here. Bearcat (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- Bearcat, it was open for three weeks. I have reposted the request. --evrik (talk) 00:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- It wasn't my responsibility to have known that there was a previous merger proposal in any place other than here, or even to have gone gallivanting around to see if there might be. It's your job to make sure that the distinction is clarified here, not anybody else's job to read your mind to know that there was some discussion elsewhere. My job begins and ends with looking at this page, and noticing that all you did was to resubmit this for another kick at the can without making any changes after the last time it was rejected, and it's not my responsibility to have known anything about any other discussions that didn't take place on this page. And furthermore, that merger discussion features just one other participant besides you preemptively opposing it yourself as part of the process of even initiating it, so that in no way qualifies as any sort of "consensus" that I should take seriously either. "I opposed it myself right in the nomination, and got one other person to agree with me, so BOOYA!" is not how consensus works around here. Bearcat (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)