Sdrqaz
This is Sdrqaz's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
Hey, I was slightly perplexed by your 12:47 15 February edit on British Government frontbench page. The rank of the posts that they were appointed to had been kept in the previous edits and I don't understand the logic behind not having the ministers in rank order (so Secretary of State, Minister of State, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State). Please enlighten me regarding this matter.
Sdrqaz (talk) 01:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- I placed the ranks to show what level they hold in terms of ministerial seniority. Then there's also the appointments eg Minister for Defence Procurement and Minister of State for the Armed Forces which are the responsibilities they hold. Under those pages, they show the post holder, regardless if they were PUSS or Min of State. Those holding these appointments for example, can alternate or be promoted. Philip Dunne (Ludlow MP) for example was a Min State (I believe) for Defence Procurement, then Harriet Baldwin took the appointment but as a PUSS. It switches in every reshuffle. Feel free to rank them accordingly but I think it's best to show both rank and appointment and commons first, lords last. I'm not an expert on the formatting so thanks for the labelling.
- Finding out who's responsible for what is a mystery with news and gov.uk not updating properly.
- Hi BlueD954, thanks for getting back to me. It's just that previously that page had integrated the offices as one piece of information so the role was Minister of State for Middle East & North Africa instead of Minister for Middle East & North Africa, Minister of State. I had followed this format because it seemed more concise as it coalesced the information into a single piece. Also I'd like to clarify what you mean when you write that you want to put rank and appointment first. Obviously rank means Secretary of State, Minister of State etc but what do you mean by appointment?
- I'd also like to agree with you on how it's been difficult to find information. I've been using Ministerial appointments: February 2020 for most of my information.
- I edited accordingly so format as you wish. Also, better if you leave the conversation on your talk page - keep it to one page. BlueD954 (talk) 05:56, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign endorsements for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign endorsements is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign endorsements until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- Andy Mabbett, I am most grateful for your notification that the article is up for deletion and have contributed to the discussion accordingly. Although I am certain that you are a far more experienced user of Wikipedia than I, it seems like the discussion has gotten slightly personal and perhaps uncivil. I think it would be conducive to the health of the discussion that we refrain from engaging in incivility when discussing matters with fellow users who, like you and I, simply want what is best for Wikipedia at large.
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Sgarvey
Howdy. I guess @Sgarvey: is going to ignore everybody & not respond to anyone at his talkpage. GoodDay (talk) 20:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi GoodDay, are you talking about their edits regarding California's 21st? I was under the impression that it was called today by the AP.[1]
- Sdrqaz (talk) 22:01, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- More concerned, that he won't answer to anybody, period. No matter what the topic. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. GoodDay, there's not much either of us can do, unfortunately. Obviously it's ideal for someone to reply, but I guess it's their prerogative.
- Sdrqaz (talk) 22:21, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
References
Your thread has been archived
Hi Sdrqaz! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|