User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20130129081336/@comment-1398253-20130130175232: Difference between revisions
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="quote"> | <div class="quote"> | ||
CzechOut wrote: | CzechOut wrote: | ||
| Line 11: | Line 10: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
What separation? I renamed the Oswin page to Clara Oswin Oswald, that's the opposite of splitting it. My intent was that they should be one page. Tangerineduel, an admin, was the one who did the split, on December 28. As I said in the edit summary, they're the same person, but we just don't know how that's possible yet. | What separation? I renamed the Oswin page to Clara Oswin Oswald, that's the opposite of splitting it. My intent was that they should be one page. Tangerineduel, an admin, was the one who did the split, on December 28. As I said in the edit summary, they're the same person, but we just don't know how that's possible yet. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20130129081336-188432/20130130175232-1398253]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 21:42, 27 April 2023
CzechOut wrote: Secondarily, from a wiki administration standpoint, we also have the unquestionably bad precedent of a user, in the middle of a discussion, simply pre-empting the end of that discussion and splitting pages. That will not be allowed to stand.
If this discussion ends in a hung jury, the pages are still going back to one article because Digifiend went against our normal rules of order.
Everyone participating in this discussion should understand that this is the discussion to split the article apart. Digifiend's separation is invalid, as it was done without consensus. If we end up with a hung jury, then there's no consensus for change from the original, single article approach and the article remains as it originally was — one article.
In order for the article to be split, there must be a clear and overwhelming consensus in this thread for that eventuality.
What separation? I renamed the Oswin page to Clara Oswin Oswald, that's the opposite of splitting it. My intent was that they should be one page. Tangerineduel, an admin, was the one who did the split, on December 28. As I said in the edit summary, they're the same person, but we just don't know how that's possible yet.
