Editing Talk:Toaster/Archive 1
Discussion page of Toaster/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Does anybody think we should upload an image of an actual toaster to illustrate this page? I know a lot of the contributors here seem to be fairly serious individuals, but if someone could do it I think it would be cute. Just a pic of an actual chrome toaster - it'll be great, I think. | Does anybody think we should upload an image of an actual toaster to illustrate this page? I know a lot of the contributors here seem to be fairly serious individuals, but if someone could do it I think it would be cute. Just a pic of an actual chrome toaster - it'll be great, I think. | ||
:''[[User:Jzanjani|Jzanjani]] 21:41, 7 October 2005 (EDT)'' | :''[[User:Jzanjani|Jzanjani]] 21:41, 7 October 2005 (EDT)'' | ||
| Line 9: | Line 7: | ||
:''[[User:Jzanjani|Jzanjani]] 21:45, 7 October 2005 (EDT)'' | :''[[User:Jzanjani|Jzanjani]] 21:45, 7 October 2005 (EDT)'' | ||
Adorable. --[[User: | Adorable. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 22:06, 7 October 2005 (EDT) | ||
The Toaster is watching all of us, and waiting for its time to return home. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 22:27, 7 October 2005 (EDT) | The Toaster is watching all of us, and waiting for its time to return home. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 22:27, 7 October 2005 (EDT) | ||
| Line 15: | Line 13: | ||
:I really think the character box itself is overboard and must go, though the other in article stuff as well as picture can stay.---Ricimer, October 8, 2005 | :I really think the character box itself is overboard and must go, though the other in article stuff as well as picture can stay.---Ricimer, October 8, 2005 | ||
::Yeah, okay. --[[User: | ::Yeah, okay. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 10:48, 8 October 2005 (EDT) | ||
::The character box is perfect for a page that's certainly never going to grow larger. It's arguably the most humorous article we have. I think it really livens up the thing, especially considering it's supposed to be a racial epiphet. Silly page, right? Before we ransack it, let it sit for a bit and get a group consensus. If the majority's a bit too anal about it, we make the change. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:41, 8 October 2005 (EDT) | ::The character box is perfect for a page that's certainly never going to grow larger. It's arguably the most humorous article we have. I think it really livens up the thing, especially considering it's supposed to be a racial epiphet. Silly page, right? Before we ransack it, let it sit for a bit and get a group consensus. If the majority's a bit too anal about it, we make the change. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:41, 8 October 2005 (EDT) | ||
:::It was only meant to be a word defination page, exactly like the "[[frak]]" page. We are not trying to "liven things up" so much as we are striving for accuracy.---Ricimer, October 8, 2005 | :::It was only meant to be a word defination page, exactly like the "[[frak]]" page. We are not trying to "liven things up" so much as we are striving for accuracy.---Ricimer, October 8, 2005 | ||
::::You have a point, albeit tenuous for this one page. Let's let consensus work here for a few days. If Peter, of ALL people, finds the site humorous enough to create a category for future pages, then others may find it enjoyable enough. Besides, the information there remains accurate, and a BSG toaster "is" really a Cylon (just not the bread-using kind). And, frankly, Ricimer, I know this article was good for me as you and Jzanjani's antics haven't made me laugh much in the last few days. I don't know, maybe the "frak" page could use a little levity...heh-heh. And, let's see what Joe says about it. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 12:02, 8 October 2005 (EDT) | ::::You have a point, albeit tenuous for this one page. Let's let consensus work here for a few days. If Peter, of ALL people, finds the site humorous enough to create a category for future pages, then others may find it enjoyable enough. Besides, the information there remains accurate, and a BSG toaster "is" really a Cylon (just not the bread-using kind). And, frankly, Ricimer, I know this article was good for me as you and Jzanjani's antics haven't made me laugh much in the last few days. I don't know, maybe the "frak" page could use a little levity...heh-heh. And, let's see what Joe says about it. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 12:02, 8 October 2005 (EDT) | ||
== Our Silly Pages should be rare == | == Our Silly Pages should be rare == | ||
| Line 40: | Line 36: | ||
I propose that this page be reverted to the edit on 02:09, 8 October 2005. I have before expressed my personal belief that while certain of our "extra" articles may be fun (drinking games and such), turning this actual term from the series into a "silly" article has added nothing to it. The crux of it, is that as BSWiki editors, it is our responsibility to strive for accuracy, Non-POV statements, etc. "Toaster" is an actual term on the series. Making changes to it has shown that we have fallen away from our own high standards. At least, the high standards that I would like us to maintain, if I were in a position to do so. | I propose that this page be reverted to the edit on 02:09, 8 October 2005. I have before expressed my personal belief that while certain of our "extra" articles may be fun (drinking games and such), turning this actual term from the series into a "silly" article has added nothing to it. The crux of it, is that as BSWiki editors, it is our responsibility to strive for accuracy, Non-POV statements, etc. "Toaster" is an actual term on the series. Making changes to it has shown that we have fallen away from our own high standards. At least, the high standards that I would like us to maintain, if I were in a position to do so. | ||
Further: The two chief supporters of this current version seem to be Spencerian and | Further: The two chief supporters of this current version seem to be Spencerian and Peter Farago; Joe never commented on it one way or the other. Enough time has passed that we must re-evaluate the current consensus as to its fate, and then '''we must obey the Will of the Consensus'''. --->We need to assess how the current community stands on this: troll '''Jzanjani''' has been banned repeatedly, and if his ban has expired, he has chosen not to return here for months. Meanwhile, Users Day and SteelViper ascended to Administrator status well ''after'' the last time there was serious discussion as to the standardized form of this page, which would leave 2 Administrators ''for'' the current version, 2 Administrators whose views are ''unknown'', and 1 Bureaucrat, Joe, who's view is either unknown, or he abstained. This decision must be made, and for the sake of accuracy, and the long-term standards which this wiki hopes to uphold, I for one support returning it to a standardized article. 5 by 5. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 04:42, 20 February 2006 (EST) | ||
:I don't think that our status as administrator should have anything to do with the matter. All it means is that we've got that little "delete" button above this article, and that's not even what is being proposed. If Spencerian's or Peter's opinions carry any more weight around here than others it is more due to their reputations as editors than anything else (at least that's how it is for me). As for being in a position to maintain high standards... I think you're very much in a position to do so. Not only through the use of the "edit" button on the articles, but also through establishing [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] on talk pages (exactly like you are doing now). | :I don't think that our status as administrator should have anything to do with the matter. All it means is that we've got that little "delete" button above this article, and that's not even what is being proposed. If Spencerian's or Peter's opinions carry any more weight around here than others it is more due to their reputations as editors than anything else (at least that's how it is for me). As for being in a position to maintain high standards... I think you're very much in a position to do so. Not only through the use of the "edit" button on the articles, but also through establishing [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] on talk pages (exactly like you are doing now). | ||
| Line 51: | Line 47: | ||
::::In all fairness Spencerian, it is somewhat premature to state that I have "lost" the consensus, when in fact, only you, myself, and SteelViper has as of this posting checked in yet | ::::In all fairness Spencerian, it is somewhat premature to state that I have "lost" the consensus, when in fact, only you, myself, and SteelViper has as of this posting checked in yet. I respect your opinion, and based on the earlier stuff I knew you would probably not support this change, however, not everyone might share this view towards sillyness on a page which is an actual article (within the show). I believe we should wait for further news. Meanwhile, I'll put it to vote: | ||
'''Should this article be standardized, and no longer be a | '''Should this article be standardized, and no longer be a stilly page?''' | ||
:'''Keep its current silly form''' | :'''Keep its current silly form''' | ||
:'''Standardize this article back to a non-silly terminology page''' | :'''Standardize this article back to a non-silly terminology page''' | ||
: | :*--[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 23:17, 20 February 2006 (EST) | ||