User talk:Saturday

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi there! Welcome to my talk page. Any messages left here will be replied to here unless it is otherwise specified. Please try to remember to sign your posts with ~~~~ (four tildes) and post messages at the bottom. Enjoy your stay. Thank you.--Phil

Archives

---

Archive 1 ^{March 16, 2006 to November 12, 2006}

Archive 2 ^{November 12, 2006 to February 27, 2007}

Archive 3 ^{February 27, 2007 to May 22, 2007}

Archive 4 ^{May 22, 2007 to August 27, 2007}

Archive 5 ^{August 27, 2007 to January 31, 2008}

[edit] Dresden

Fair enough. I don't intend to get into an edit war on the subject. I see it as prominent in the city's cycle of destruction and reconstruction, as do The Telegraph, CNN, the New York Times and USA Today but you don't. Dresden is still very much an unsettled city. I'm going to put these links on the article's talk page in case anyone wants them in the future if a decision is made that the mention of the bombings is important. Travellingcari (talk) 05:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Right... Well the fact of the matter is that the article is about the flooding, not the bombing. I know the article doesn't focus on the bombing but if it isn't directly related to the article subject matter (ie. Short period of time between flooding and bombing, flooding caused by damage from bombing, etc.) then I think it should go. The article is also about the European flooding in general, if there was an article on Dresden flooding alone then it could certainly be mentioned. I don't like removing something if someone disagrees with me without consensus, do you wish to get a third party involved? Saturday ^Contribs 05:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, but I don't care enough to argue it. I can see your reasoning, even if I don't exactly agree. There's very little interest in the article. I was in Prague immediately following the floods and when I stumbled across it, it was in a sad state. I couldn't help but add to it-- I've worried from the getgo that it was too heavy on Dresden and Prague because a) they were most affected and b) I'm most familiar with Prague having been in the city a few months later and seeing the mess first hand. I've looked at the other two flood articles and tried to see how '02 could be brought into line but all I want to do there is fix 05 and 06 so I'm being good and leaving them be. Some pruning in 2002 is probably a good thing. Sleep well, bedtime here too Travellingcari (talk) 05:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well then I'll take the line about bombing out, put it in the talk and ask for any objections. If anyone else voices them then it will go back in. Saturday ^Contribs 23:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 6	4 February 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part IV	Tensions in journalistic use of Wikipedia explored
Best of WikiWorld: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Adding citations
Dispatches: New methods to find Featured Article candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)