Talk:Les Boréades
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Peter cohen in topic Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories
editI have removed this article from Category:Operas, in accordance with the guideline at Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories. Please do not reinstate this category unless the guideline is changed. -BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
- I note that this page has already had to be protected once because of your edit warring. Do not use it to issue instructions to other editors. -- Kleinzach 15:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, if you check back, you'll find that you repeatedly edited reverted acahnge in voliation of guidelines. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have reverted the edit as the previous edit was a clear violation of Wikipedia:Consensus, given that the change was made in full knowledge that the vast majority of members of WP:WPO opposed it. If you want to persuade us do so. Don't barge in and impose your wishes.--Peter cohen 16:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- If you want to change wikipedia guidelines, follow the proper procedures. Nobody has yet made any persuasive case for why Operas should be an exception to the guideline at Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- It is you who are violating the guideline as pointed out by its original author in [[WP:WPO].
- The following is the introductory paragraph of the guideline.
- In straightforward cases an article should not be in both a category and its subcategory, for example Golden Gate Bridge is in Category:Suspension bridges, so it should not also be in Category:Bridges. However there are many articles which should be in both a subcategory and a parent category.
- You are ignoring that last sentence of the paragraph. If you had actually bothered to read the discussion in WPO, you would have seen reasons put forward. Further comments have been added since your comment. Of the six contributors to the thread I started overat WPO about your wilful vandalism of Category:Operas you are in a minority of one. I am reverting your edit in line wiht the consensus. Kindly do not persist with your edit war. As I stated over in WPO, your decision to alter an archived thread rather than post in the active talk topic demonstrates that you are acting in bad faith. --Peter cohen 10:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Peter, WP:CHILL. A content dispute is not vandalism, and if you want cast accusations of edit warring, hold off on your reversions. I posted to the archive page because it popped up in a contribs list as what appeared to be the most recent place the issue, that's all.
- AS to the guideline, yes, you do indeed quote the opening para correctly ... but if you read on down, you'll see those exceptional situations explained in more detail. Do please read that bit rather than just the opening para.
- I have read endless discussions amongst the rude people at WPO, but no have seen no reason to make Operas a general to the guidelines other than that "we don't like the guideline". If I am in a minority of one in the current discussion, it is because others who agreed on this point have, like me, withdrawn from discussions at WPO because of the prevalent WP:OWN cliqueyness thre. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Answered in WP:WPO --Peter cohen 11:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- You are ignoring that last sentence of the paragraph. If you had actually bothered to read the discussion in WPO, you would have seen reasons put forward. Further comments have been added since your comment. Of the six contributors to the thread I started overat WPO about your wilful vandalism of Category:Operas you are in a minority of one. I am reverting your edit in line wiht the consensus. Kindly do not persist with your edit war. As I stated over in WPO, your decision to alter an archived thread rather than post in the active talk topic demonstrates that you are acting in bad faith. --Peter cohen 10:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)