The linked "issue has been addressed" has never been implemented, basically ignored and even pointed out as a non issue by the CM:

What's the real harm here? It's not like the mobile page is unusable on desktop browsers. – Shog9♦ Jul 16 '15 at 21:03

Automatically convert links to popular mobile pages (such as the mobile Wikipedia) to point to the corresponding regular pages

Why does the mod insist on targeting my posts for made up issues? While also using sarcasm in comments (Until then, common sense prevails)? I'm sure that's not compliant with the "be nice" policy, as usual.

| |
  • Oh, and now another post has a "reference required" notice. I can only wonder what that's about. Funny how only my posts get those notices when there are tons of answers with no references that dont. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:11
  • Maybe you could address the actual issues in the question, the veiled insult that says I don't have common sense, I'm sure moderators are held to the be nice policy right?, and the lock to the answer over something even Shog sees as harmless. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:27
  • 4
    I honestly don't see why you're being so belligerent about this. Another user (Napoleon) as many users would do fixed the link that you added. It really wasn't clickable in the original form and in your rollbacks. The fact that this resulted in a tusle over whether to use the desktop or mobile version seems a petty excuse for an argument to be honest. What Shog9 says can be read either way ... what's the harm here really in what he was doing? – iandotkelly Jul 16 '17 at 4:35
  • @iandotkelly even if I copy paste that link and try to open it, I can't. I don't see any issue at all here. – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:37
  • @iandotkelly what's the harm in my link? He's just looking to start problems for problems sake. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:40
  • 1
    @cde did you even checked your link at all? – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:42
  • 3
    The link wasn't clickable .... really. The fact that it also switched to the desktop version too, is that really 'starting problems'? Please don't take offense where clearly none is meant. – iandotkelly Jul 16 '17 at 4:43
  • en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollywood is the valid link. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:47
  • @iandotkelly maybe he shouldn't start problems where there is none. I was in the middle of expanding that answer when he started. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:48
  • 1
    @cde you even know that you didn't had "wiki" in your first form of post, you just creating chaos over a wrong incomplete information – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:49
  • 3
    He was making it a hyperlink, not just the text of the url that you'd have to cut and paste into your browser address bar. As for 'starting problems' ... seriously, as a user with over 50k reputation on this site and significant reputation elsewhere, you understand that it is collaboratively edited by other users. – iandotkelly Jul 16 '17 at 4:50
  • @iandotkelly Why not make my fixed link a hyperlink then? Why continue to change it? – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:53
  • 4
    Please don't accuse me of making stuff up. I'm clearly stating that he both made it a hyperlink AND changed it to the desktop version of the wikipedia link. My point about the latter was 'what is the real harm here?' argument that Shog9 also applies here. Accusing someone of deliberately starting something - when all they are doing is minimally editing your post is really going too far. – iandotkelly Jul 16 '17 at 4:55
  • 2
    @cde what about you first rollback? Are you ever going to talk about that? – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 5:32
  • 2
    @cde "en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollywood is the valid link" - no it's not. Your URI is missing the scheme. Some browsers will add http:// or https:// but not all. Please read Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax. – DavidPostill Jul 16 '17 at 8:30

Your link did not work. An editor fixed it. Thank them and stop being a jackass about this.

Also, please don't quote me in irrelevant situations. It is rude. Thank you.

| |
  • I quoted you in the exact situation that was happening. From the link that Napoleon provided as justification for changing the mobile wikipedia link that I used as a source. But ok. I won't. Consider it ended. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 5:48
  • 7
    Go look at the first, 3rd, 4th revisions of your post. I did. The link straight up did not work. Fixing broken links is an admirable edit. Thank the editor for their time. – Shog9 Jul 16 '17 at 5:50
  • Mobile web edit system isn't as seamless as the desktop version. The 4th has the fixed link en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollywood – cde Jul 16 '17 at 5:59
  • 8
    I do half my job on mobile. When I make a mistake and someone else fixes it, I thank them. That's just good manners. – Shog9 Jul 16 '17 at 6:03

Your original post:

enter image description here

Response of the link you used :

enter image description here

Napoleon fixed that link while making it desktop version too but you roll-backed it and fixed mobile link later. You just rollbacked a valid edit there.

enter image description here

Shog's comment doesn't say to not fix broken links.

| |
  • You intentionally left out the wiki in the url movies.stackexchange.com/revisions/76351/4 – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:35
  • And that statement is true, the "warning" is clear. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:37
  • 2
    @cde that's your doing, I gave screenshot of your own hand written post. Check first rivison, – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:38
  • 2
    Its untrue that you're not allowed to add a citation to a post. The fact that one user edited your citation on another post (primarily to fix the broken link) does not mean you can't add a citation here or explain why you are not doing so. There is no need for all this drama really. – iandotkelly Jul 16 '17 at 4:40
  • 1
    And why you rollback napolepn's edit when you corrected that same mistake later on yourself. – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:41
  • Not to fix a broken link. Because it was fixed and he still changed it twice and locked the post and threatened me via moderator message over it. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:42
  • @cde explain your first rollback – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:43
  • Explain the insult first. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:48
  • And shog's comment is saying that there is no problem with them in the first place. Nothing to fix. – cde Jul 16 '17 at 4:49
  • @cde your first link didn't had "wiki", I gave you secreenshot and link but you are still keeping your eyes shut and repeating same line again and again. – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:50
  • 3
    @cde use "contact us" if you feel so threatened by getting your not hyper-linked non working link getting fixed. – Ankit Sharma Jul 16 '17 at 4:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .