You will stop creating new Disambiguation Pages until the matter is resolved. I will tolerate editing existing pages even if they are marked for deletion. For the information of others, the "Cindy" page had one fist name only entry and two with variations including "Cindi" with surnames. ML4E (talk) 18:24, February 12, 2019 (UTC)
I have had enough of your unilateral Category creation. The latest, "Category:North American Union Places" is a step too far. See the Talk Page for my objections. You have also recently created at least two cats without sufficient thought on what to call them, e.g. "Confederate Periodicals" and "CP Cities". While the notion is fine, those two will require work to rename if there is consensus on a name change like there is for "CP Cities".
From now on, if you create a category without any discussion before hand, I will unilaterally delete it and roll-back the changes. Be forewarned. Continued misconduct will lead to a time-out via account suspension. ML4E (talk) 17:48, April 25, 2018 (UTC)
I am getting very frustrated with the mechanical way you are going through the changes in the templates. You are not checking to see if the changes do what you think they do. Previously, you put in non-existing templates and just left the red links. I will grant you that you have been more careful with that subsequently. However, you continue to make edits under the assumption that all templates have been changed to reflect the new format. At least two fictional character templates ("Fatherland" and BtB) have not yet been changed so they do not generate the story character category.
While your intentions are good, this type of blitz changes do as much damage as deliberate vandalism. I am asking you to check your changes before you post them (there is a preview button for that purpose) to see if templates have been updated. If not, then stop doing template updates and do something else. ML4E (talk) 16:30, October 28, 2017 (UTC)
Stop, stop RIGHT NOW. We DO NOT HAVE minor pages for short story characters. We have never discussed them, and frankly, given the small pool of characters in most stories, I don't think that we need Minor Characters pages for short works.
But we need to to reach consensus before moving forward.
I think they might be needed in some cases. Some of HT's shorts have enough named minor characters to justify it. "Counting Potsherds" has quite a few anemic character articles about named characters who make walk-on roles, and past fictional kings who are named but not otherwise described. All of these might be better conflated into a page for MFC in CP.
As for the three MFC in DiV, I think they add color to the provincial Roman town that HT portrayed.
Wow, just wow. This is not something we agreed to and we have discussed it in the past. I think either the creation of a character article is justified or its not, especially for a short story, without going to Minor Characters article. In the specific case of DiV, I think "Calvina" is unwarranted. She appears in the "Gauis Tero" character template as his spouse and the article, whether separate or in a collective, adds nothing. The other two might stand but as individual articles. ML4E (talk) 20:01, September 2, 2016 (UTC)
We never finished up this conversation. Do we want to go down the road of Minor Fictional Characters pages or not?
Short stories by definition don't have much room for inconsequential elements. Even a character with a quick line of dialog is can wind up being pretty important to the overall arc of the story. Additionally, a "MFC in "Short Story" may be limited to a character or two, which would just lead to irrelevance on top of irrelevance.
On the other hand, I do acknowledge that there are plenty of short story characters who don't do much beyond providing some "color" or "texture" to the piece, and so the articles aren't particularly interesting.
Further, there are some short works that are so short that I really don't know if do we need individual character pages. A good example is "Half the Battle", which is just a series of vignettes set over a few generations, and takes only a few pages. The characters are stock characters by design, so we have several articles that aren't terribly substantial, and I do wonder if it might be better to simply collect them onto a single page. Another example is that recent "The Mammyth" piece; I've read it, but I haven't written articles because I kind of feel that creating a bunch of articles that are going to be essentially identical is kind of a waste of time. (Well, that and it's really a joke that doesn't quite land.)
Anyway, there's a way to address the minor short story character situation, but I don't think approach we take to novels and series is appropriate.
I do not object to what you wrote about William Shirer in the Literary Allusions article following my comments in Talk:Edward R. Murrow. What I do object to is your unilateral action without waiting for others to comment. Therefore I have rolled-back your changes and locked the article to Administrator level pending such comments.
I am going to ask you to stop adding band member names like "John Lennon" for the Beatles, etc. until this is decided by the moderators. Go do something else if you want. ML4E (talk) 22:37, October 9, 2015 (UTC)
It occurs to me that some of the "Literary Comments" you have made and I rolled-back could fit in the Literary Allusions in Turtledove's Work article. For instance, the comment you made in the Samantha O'Neill article referring to the TV show Bewitched would be appropriate here. Something for you to consider. ML4E (talk) 20:30, October 1, 2015 (UTC)