Commons talk:Please consider being more concise so as not to confuse other parties in your intentions and to avoid misunderstandings as multiple remarks in a conversation typically are more fruitful than a single long post that will feel more like a monologue［…］

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Please consider being more concise so as not to confuse other parties in your intentions and to avoid misunderstandings as multiple remarks in a conversation typically are more fruitful than a single long post that will feel more like a monologue［…］.

• This is not a forum for general discussion of the page’s subject.
• Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
• Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
• New to Commons? Check out the project scope. Ask questions, get answers.

An essay needs humour, or compelling prose, and this has neither

There once was an admin: Revent

Who in arguments would never relent

An essay -- I'll help write!

But it turned out to be shite

And verbosity he could not prevent.

Another admin, this one feline of humour

Eyes glazed over, according to rumour

When complaints were presented

It is said he resented

If not written in ten words or fewer

I'm quite impressed at this essay's tedious, verbose and humourless arguments about the importance of not engaging in tedious, verbose and humourless arguments. Was it intended to be ironic? I must say, I'm already quite aware that I can go on a bit at times (as can the pair of you, oh my) but really you didn't need to go to all this trouble to prepare a little COM:CONCISE linky thing to present me with next time we engage at AN or some other friendly venue. I'm quite touched by your thoughtfulness. Christmas has come early. You shouldn't have. Really, you shouldn't have. *sigh* -- Colin (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@Colin: . Indeed it was intended to be ironic. It's content intentionally is mostly irrelevant and incoherent. The long text is meant to be a filler to illustrate the point. Bear in mind this isn't just about you and your long posts was not the motivation behind drafting it as it was mainly a different user who also made a long post that motivated me into writing this. It has nothing to do with any particular user. This isn't intended to criticize either.

On Wikipedia and Commons, an Essay is what we consider a non-policy and non-guideline opinion piece written by one or few users. They aren't meant to be enforced and can be completely ignored should you wish. Even the content of the essay in its concise form is simply a suggestion: "Please consider being more concise". However, typically users take the spirit of the essay into consideration. Consider Category:Commons essays or m:Category:Essays related to Wikipedia which is full of many essays. For example Commons:Balancing copyright claims discusses an issue based on the opinion of a single user where as Commons:Attack page is written by many and even has an English Wikipedia counterpart.

I realize you think I and Revent (based on your poem) are out to get you. I have seen many users self destruct over similar logic in my more than a decade here. This may sound strange to you but, I used to make REALLY REALLY long posts in the past going into every detail, being very through with my remarks and analysis. I noticed how inefficient this was which lead me to make many shorter posts. My essay merely reflects this opinion of mine.

Honestly, based on my past interaction I do not expect you to reply to this but if you do read it I hope you understand the intent better. All I ask is that you merely consider the spirit of the essay.

-- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 21:04, 17 December 2016 (UTC)