FANDOM


  • I did not mean to overwrite your addition to the section. I was taking your advice to heart, that entries should be written from the perspective of a journalist or a historian. If that is the case, then the use of personal pronouns should be avoided.

    Also when you mention "sections of the letters disappear", are you referring to letters fading out, the phrase seems a little ambigious. Moreover,  DIN Pro font might require a bit of explanation,  not everyone is an expert on font types.

    Another point I would like to bring to your attention: "modified type", are you referring to the typeface, or an alternative credit sequence.

    Nemo2012 (talk) 11:58, May 9, 2018 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    • any explanation beyond what i have already written will be considered excessive. links to a wikipedia.org article or the reddit post/comment by bob munroe to establish it is indeed the font used are the extent of additional information to be deemed acceptable.  it is beyond the scope of this wiki to inform readers more on the subject.

        Loading editor
    • Please be more selective in your choice of images added to the episode.  The Nauvoo retrieval scene was only a few minutes out of the entire episode.  It may be more effective to include no more than five images and find a high quality video clip instead to highlight the scene. 24 images from the scene is excessive.

      I will examine the merit of your section on "unanswered questions".  it is not one of the standard sections prescribed.

      EDIT: the questions ought to be written to be more concise.  if the topic merits exploration a brief answer to those questions should be sought.  The questions also should not warrant a full section but instead be a smaller part of an existing section.  It may be better to eliminate it from the episode article and move it to the Nauvoo article or at least move it to the Mormons article.  Every effort should be made to be less wordy but to use more formal traditional academic/journalistic language instead of conversational language.   once a good answer is available, it would replace the questions.  otherwise, the questions may not warrant exploration and could be eliminated

        Loading editor
    • In season 2, I placed it in trivia and you moved it to this section called Unanswered Questions ? (I think it was SSTC time code). I was simply following the precedent you laid out. If you want to to be a part of the trivia section, how shall it be formatted?

        Loading editor
    • AlbertEpstein wrote:
       

      I will examine the merit of your section on "unanswered questions".  it is not one of the standard sections prescribed.

      EDIT: the questions ought to be written to be more concise.  if the topic merits exploration a brief answer to those questions should be sought.  The questions also should not warrant a full section but instead be a smaller part of an existing section.  It may be better to eliminate it from the episode article and move it to the Nauvoo article or at least move it to the Mormons article.  Every effort should be made to be less wordy but to use more formal traditional academic/journalistic language instead of conversational language.   once a good answer is available, it would replace the questions.  otherwise, the questions may not warrant exploration and could be eliminated

      With respect to the questions, I was trying to elaborate, so readers could understand the gist of my question? Would the same rationale apply to the stars on the UN emblem (of putting it in another section, because the idea was introduced in this episode)? By the way, was the question addressed in the books, with respect to the three stars?

      With respect to the images, I focus on reports and video news accounts looking for "easter eggs". Another reason is to admire the Computer Graphics Imagery. Has there been a ruling on creating image galleries based on theme.

      I included a video clip of the Navoo in the video section, and it has a maximum resolution of 1080p.

      Where are you getting that I have included 24 images from a scene? It was from the entire episode.

        Loading editor
    • let's not get into the trap again of deflecting on other examples. the galleries need to be managed.  there are better places for this stuff.

      if you don't want to heed any guidance then i won't share my impressions leading to my decisions and actions.  in such a case, you can accept decisions without feedback.

      i'm tried repeatedly to be very generous without benefit and my patience is thin

        Loading editor
    • First of all , if you do not want to help, then DON'T.

      You are an Administrator now, with that position comes responsibility and a change in temperment. 

      You need to develop a "THICKER SKIN", that includes patience, especially with respect to user inquiries. If you don't have said patience, you need to STEP DOWN.

      The reason I brought up images galleries, is because I remember a whole discussion on episode image galleries.

      The same rationale applies to unanswered question .

      In fact here is the amendment via the edit log:

      http://expanse.wikia.com/wiki/Cascade?direction=prev&oldid=30839

      It seems the unanswered questions was called "Speculation"

      It also includes the themed based image galleries.

        Loading editor
    • You asked for my opinion.  I have given my guidance and you are demonstrating a resistance to it.   You have evaded a good faith discussion. 

      You have escalated in the past and you demanded that I be relieved. The judgment came down that you were making personal attacks against me and that I would not be relieved.  You have been warned in the past by myself and by other administrators so I do not need to repeat myself or the warnings of the past.

      I have expressed that my patience on this recurring matter is dwindling.

        Loading editor
    • Point one -  a discussion is suppose to be a collaboration not a fiat

      Point two - the "council" ruled on my contributions not on any alleged "personal attacks" get your facts straight. But as I said if you continue to exhibit this "short fuse"of yours:

      You have escalated in the past and you demanded that I be relieved. The judgment came down that you were making personal attacks against me and that I would not be relieved. You have been warned in the past by myself and by other administrators so I do not need to repeat myself or the warnings of the past.

      I have expressed that my patience on this recurring matter is dwindling.

      This is all the more reason for you to step down.

      Finally, it's obvious that you are very sensitive to criticism, so I will just address my concerns to Fandyllic or any other on-duty admin

      So have a Good Day

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.