Due to persistent vandalism, account creation has been suspended. If you would like an account, please contact Charlie Reams on Apterous.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tim Rice"
TobyMcDonald (talk | contribs) |
The Doctor (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::That's with the important caveat that Wikipedia is actually doing the po-faced stuff, which it now does.--[[User:Launchballer|Launchballer]] ([[User talk:Launchballer|talk]]) 11:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC) | ::That's with the important caveat that Wikipedia is actually doing the po-faced stuff, which it now does.--[[User:Launchballer|Launchballer]] ([[User talk:Launchballer|talk]]) 11:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC) | ||
:::A few of us don't like those type of comments and opinions on articles, so to stay on the safe side, I think they're better off excluded. [[User:TobyMcDonald|TobyMcDonald]] 18:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC) | :::A few of us don't like those type of comments and opinions on articles, so to stay on the safe side, I think they're better off excluded. [[User:TobyMcDonald|TobyMcDonald]] 18:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | But by that same logic, if those who dislike snarky comments think they’re “better off excluded”, why aren’t they removing them from pre-existing pages? One rule for some guests and another for others? | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with the issue of inconsistencies - if you want to go around removing this stuff then do so, but don't have a go at those of us who like being a bit more humorous. It was well established in [[Countdown:Articles_for_deletion/Archives#Jade_Goody|2009]] that "it's not like genuine guest pages are serious autobiographies". [[User:The Doctor|The Doctor]] ([[User talk:The Doctor|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/The_Doctor|contribs]]) 20:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:46, 2 February 2024
Why was the snark on Tasha Ghouri’s page removed but the snark on Tim Rice’s wasn’t?
I don’t mind the snark staying, if the snark about Tasha gets reinstated- lots of pages have elements of comedy to them- Geoffrey Durham, Philip Franks, Joan Bakewell etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christy Cooper (talk • contribs) 14:25, 30 January 2024
- I agree. Let Wikipedia do the po-faced stuff. We should be able to have some fun.--Launchballer (talk) 17:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- That's with the important caveat that Wikipedia is actually doing the po-faced stuff, which it now does.--Launchballer (talk) 11:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- A few of us don't like those type of comments and opinions on articles, so to stay on the safe side, I think they're better off excluded. TobyMcDonald 18:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- That's with the important caveat that Wikipedia is actually doing the po-faced stuff, which it now does.--Launchballer (talk) 11:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
But by that same logic, if those who dislike snarky comments think they’re “better off excluded”, why aren’t they removing them from pre-existing pages? One rule for some guests and another for others?
I agree with the issue of inconsistencies - if you want to go around removing this stuff then do so, but don't have a go at those of us who like being a bit more humorous. It was well established in 2009 that "it's not like genuine guest pages are serious autobiographies". The Doctor (talk | contribs) 20:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
