20,741
edits
Talk:DNS: Difference between revisions
m
responding to User:T3r
Red Leader (talk | contribs) m (Indentation) |
m (responding to User:T3r) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:: Thank you. | :: Thank you. | ||
:: [[User:T3r|T3r]] ([[User talk:T3r|talk]]) 03:01, 18 November 2016 (EST) | :: [[User:T3r|T3r]] ([[User talk:T3r|talk]]) 03:01, 18 November 2016 (EST) | ||
::: Sorry, I missed your response. Like I stated previously, forking articles is perfectly within the legal boundaries of the wiki (if in doubt, see the main page which reads: "'''Text is available under the GNU GPL Version 2; additional terms may apply. Please view the media description page for details about the license of specific media files. See Terms of use for details.'''"). That being said, the motivation for forking was merely the disparity between the information provided in the archives and what is (currently) provided in the wiki. Thus, I may end up deleting the article I updated at some point - but for now, it simply makes sense to maintain the corresponding pointers in the light of the mentioned information disparity. Note that I was using a different title, and you were the one deleting the edited version and hijacking the contents I was, and still am, maintaining using the title I was using. Therefore, and with all due respect, please try to tread more carefully - this kind of behavior would not be tolerated on Wikipedia, and it would most definitely not be tolerated among fellow admins (and I highly doubt that you would deal with such a situation by reverting commits made by fellow contributors just like that). Keep in mind that you -specifically- have been encouraging folks on various ocassions to get involved in documenting your contributions, specifically inviting people to help by contributing to the wiki<ref>{{cite web | |||
|url = https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/27584204/ | |||
|title = <nowiki> Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up: FlightGear release plan </nowiki> | |||
|author = <nowiki> Torsten Dreyer </nowiki> | |||
|date = Jun 1st, 2011 | |||
|added = Jun 1st, 2011 | |||
|script_version = 0.40 | |||
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | |||
|url = https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/32895412/ | |||
|title = <nowiki> Re: [Flightgear-devel] Heads up: --jpg-httpd is gone </nowiki> | |||
|author = <nowiki> Torsten Dreyer </nowiki> | |||
|date = Oct 3rd, 2014 | |||
|added = Oct 3rd, 2014 | |||
|script_version = 0.40 | |||
}}</ref>. I am well aware that quotes (or for that matter, refs) are fairly annoying and a poor substitute for proper documentation - but as long as proper documentation is not provided, and maintained/updated, by the corresponding contributors, it clearly is better than having nothing. Now, we can obviously make this another major peeing contest, but just imagine for a second that you'd have to take another hiatus from FG matters and if, and how, having the corresponding quotes/refs retained may be useful at some later point in time - no matter if that means helping you, or people interested in matters that you were previously handling. Thus, this really isn't one of those ocassions where it particularly helpful to come across like alpha males just to make our point - as a matter of fact, you will be well aware that we've had the same discussion with other contributors previously, including much more senior folks, and it's also not that you have any particular stakes in the corresponding documentation (or features), which is why the whole vetoing-principle will appear even more problematic than in incidents like the radio-propagation patches. So, I suggest that we work out a compromise to make this work without stepping on our toes. I am offering to delete the forked version as soon as possible. To see that this can work out remarkably well, see Stuart's contributions to the [[High-Level Architecture]] article. All the best, and have a nice weekend. --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 11:15, 20 November 2016 (EST) | |||
{{Appendix}} | |||