Talk:William Bird Herapath

Working direct link replaced by redirect

Another editor insists of replacing a working direct link by a redirect. This is completely superfluous and does not help our readers at all. He seems to do this in the - IMHO - mistaken believe that piping is bad and that redirects are better. The Banner talk 13:39, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I created the link as a piped link on 21 Aug 2023 while making a more substantial edit. I used the spelling "Redmaids' School" found in the source. The following day I noticed a page error in a reference, and while correcting it, also corrected the name of the school to "The Red Maids' School", which is its standard form, and depiped the link, in accordance with MOS:NOPIPE. You seem to have followed me here from my edit history, and made a number of disruptive edits without understanding the situation, ignoring the advice given in WP:NOTBROKEN. Please stop doing that. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

You are again hiding behind shortcuts instead of making useful edits. I love it that you ar5e now accusing me of hounding, quite often the hallmark of an editor who has no real arguments to defends its disruptive and/or useless edits. You are more pre-occupied with the shortcuts then the actual readers. (And we write the encyclopedia for the readers, not for editor-hobby-ism.) The Banner talk 14:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not hiding behind anything. I'm asking you to follow the guidelines that are set out by Wikipedia to avoid conflicts. It's clear that you've followed my edit history to "William Bird Herapath", and that your edits there are intended simply to revert my edits, without reference to their correctness. In three edits there, in under thirteen hours, you introduced or reintroduced three separate errors, because you haven't taken the time to understand the context of the article.

Didn't you notice the almost unanimous consensus against your point of view at WT:REDIR? Haven't you asked yourself why nobody else is reverting my edits? It's very unlikely that a consensus will form here on a Talk page that has almost no traffic. Would you be willing to submit to some form of arbitration? Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 19:40, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I am asking you to follow common sense but again you come with big words and shortcuts. Still not a word about our readers. The Banner talk 23:15, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

The problem with common sense is that it can differ from one reasonable person to another, and that can lead to conflicts. I post shortcuts in the hope that you'll follow them, read the pages they lead to, and try to understand the guidelines I'm following. If you don't like long words, here are some short ones:

• me no like you follow me. me want you stop.
• me no like you revert me. me want you put back like same.

"Still not a word about our readers": I think I addressed that point here and here, and others have also done so - here, for example.

I think it's time to ask for arbitration. I'll ping you when I've decided what to do. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 12:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

More big words to deflect he issue. And you are not the owner of this page. Beside this, Not everybody agrees with your stance, as you stated above yourself. It is you making this a big thing. The Banner talk 12:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC)