User talk:Mroth

From the Wikimedia Foundation
Jump to: navigation, search
--MZMcBride 04:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please create a user page

Hi Mroth,

Please can you create a user page as mentioned in the welcome message above, we prefer if we know a little bit about the people to have access here. :-)

Thanks, The Helpful One 19:55, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Yup, sorry about that! Mroth 20:35, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, made a couple of minor adjustments. :) The Helpful One 06:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Telenor presser

Hi. Telenor and WMF partner on Wikipedia mobile appears to be a duplicate of Press releases/Telenor and WMF partner on Wikipedia mobile. Can the former be deleted? --MZMcBride (talk) 02:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it can, MZ. Thank you for catching that. Mroth (talk) 18:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Your user page

Hi. I made a few tweaks to your user page. Feel free to revert if you find the changes problematic.

I couldn't tell if you intended to write "throughout public communications" or "through our public communications," but what you had ("through out public communications") was almost certainly wrong. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the latter (fixed) as further on in the sentence it states our social media channels. The Helpful One 01:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, thank you both for your edits. It now reads as I had intended. Best, Mroth (talk) 18:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


Hi. Did you intend to write "SpecialData" here? --MZMcBride (talk) 21:17, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, MZ. I did not. Fixed. Mroth (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Board of Trustees

Hi. I'm probably going to clean up Board of Trustees rather dramatically, which will likely include undoing most of your recent edits to the page (specifically the edits that added a substantial amount of text to the page). Further discussion is here. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:Staff and contractors

Hi. I've reverted your change to Template:Staff and contractors. The image looks ridiculous in the context of that page. Nearly every staff photo on that page (and there must be well over 100 by now) uses approximately the same dimensions (aspect ratio). We're not going to have one image using a completely different aspect ratio, that's absurd. The photo either needs to be cropped appropriately or the old image should remain in use (or you could take a new photo, I suppose).

The user page also looks pretty bad, but I don't really care about that. Honestly I don't really like the layout of the entire {{user info}} template, particularly the third third of the page (image/contact me), but that's a problem for another day. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Max, do you mean to be condescending to me? That is how I read this. If so, I'd appreciate if you stop. I don't know how calling a vertically oriented photo "ridiculous" and "absurd" advances anything. Mroth (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not trying to be condescending, but your recent edits to this wiki seem to indicate a "I know this is wrong and I shouldn't be doing this, but I'm going to anyway" attitude. The Board member bios, for example, and now this. This is inappropriate and I wish you would stop making edits like this.
The Sarah Stierch image looks great. Many of your past image uploads have been great. In this case, having literally over 100 mostly consistent images and then one that's completely unlike the others is unacceptable to me. Having interacted with you previously, I was under the impression that you would understand this, which is why I was surprised to see your edits today. That is, you're more than smart enough to know that this was going to be reverted. So the question becomes why you did it in the first place (which is exactly the same question I was asking after the Board bios were lengthened). --MZMcBride (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
The simplest answer would be "chain of command," in that the edits I have made have been requested of me (exactly as I made them, mind you). I'm not concerned that you would revert them, but I do appreciate your patience with me and a nice tone. I likewise enjoyed interacting with you previously, so I was surprised by what I read as fairly aggressive tone in this and the previous reverts. I'd really like to work with you as civilly as possible and appreciate your feedback. Mroth (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
I consider it a fairly bedrock principle of wiki-editing that the user making the edits or actions is responsible for them. This is one of the many reasons that sites such as the English Wikipedia have long banned group or role accounts. Any department head or Board member should have an account here; in fact, many have edited here previously. I'd be happy to revert them directly. ;-) --MZMcBride (talk) 22:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I think the photo itself is great (and it sounds like Geoff does as well). However, it's simply inappropriate for this particular page, where all of the images have specific dimensions.
I'll make a crop of this photo and re-upload it with horizontal orientation. Mroth (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
MZ, I re-added Sarah's photo, you removed that when you undid Matthew's edits, which I'm going to presume was not intentional. Thehelpfulone 21:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Eep. My apologies. You're absolutely right, I didn't intend to remove Sarah's image in that edit. Thanks for fixing that. It looks like the edits were exactly 30 seconds apart. I would think the edit conflict check would've caught that inadvertent removal, but it might've just been poor timing on my part. In any case, definitely wasn't intended. I was just trying to restore Geoff's image. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:10, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Press releases

Hi. It's 2013. :-) I just cleaned up the press releases a bit (cf. these edits). --MZMcBride (talk) 08:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, MZ. That looks great. Mroth (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
FYI. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)