This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
hello again delldot.i totally agree with you that "it would be the original picture's copyright, not that of the website it happens to be on, that matters." besides,as i said at http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Image:Eichmann.jpg&action=history :regardless of website's policies no one can claim "copyright" to original government property. 'll revert the photo's info to its original detail.is this ok with you?? Grandia01 ( talk) 15:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the very pleasant Editor Review, it would appear from what you've said that you think I'm doing an OK job, I apprecaite you taking the time. I have absolutely no intention of making an RfA, seems like it would require much more time than I can give at present. Thanks again for the responses. -- The.Q (t) (c) 16:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to help, I will keep searching for vandalism to erase it.
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.13.124.36 ( talk) 21:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
How do you know when to archive user talk pages? Happy editing,-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 23:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, this was the first time for me to modify Wikipedia. :) In the future I'll keep such comments to the discussion page. I am a biology master's student and I have never heard about plants having neurons either. I'm sure it was an accidental fluke for the author of the sentence and it wasn't supposed to be in the plant paragraph. After stumbling upon it in the article, I just had to make a snarky/sarcastic comment about it. Just so other people wouldn't miss out on the fun. :) 195.50.223.242 ( talk) 14:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Since that Westchester article is rated low on the importance scale and it's constantly the victim of heavy vandalism, do you think it should be deleted? Just a thought. Happy editing,-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 18:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind. :-D Happy editing,-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 17:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, okay? We cool? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerunner ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
If you're up, we're having yet another IP sock attack at Spyware Doctor, this one from Special:Contributions/59.101.202.232 makin the same edit and spewing profanity in his edit summaries. May I request temporary semi-protection for this page, that would seem to end this struggle tonight and let things cool down. Thanks! Snowfire51 ( talk) 11:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear delldot, you have sent me a message accusing me of vandalising wikipedia by changing andy.rofl 's page. This is not true. Andy is my flatmate and I did it on his behalf. xo Rowan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.186.121 ( talk) 12:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I've been offered to be adopted by an experienced Wikipedian! Happy-happy joy-joy, happy-happy joy-joy!-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 00:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for delisting this. Geometry guy 00:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you :-) - It's always a pleasure to help keep wiki clean :-) Take care, friend! Scarian Call me Pat 15:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I split the page, That is not vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastertweak ( talk • contribs) 15:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, I was splitting it because it was too big, Im not used to the Wiki tags and im used to my own system of just saving back and forth but im sorry for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastertweak ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
lol thx, yeah I reported the cue bot but how do I undo the deletetion so its back to the split so people can add to it again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastertweak ( talk • contribs) 16:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for my delayed response. I think every peer review of medical articles needs to be announced on WP:MED, because many members don't seem to be monitoring the peer review page. I certainly don't, although I certainly should :-)
Before I head over to the PR page, my warmest compliments on your neurotraumatology work. When updating stroke I was struck by the large number of related articles from your hand (e.g. the intra- and extra-axial haemorrhage articles) and the care invested in them. Keep up the great work. JFW | T@lk 18:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Do you contribute to the Uncyclopedia as well?-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 23:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Why did you delete the article East Lake Academy? I used to attend the school and found it was gone and want to know why. KC109 ( talk) 01:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
hello again ms delldot.hope you're doing well.delldot at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Robert_ley.jpg it says that the image is considered for speedy deletion because a fair use rationale is not provided,why should anyone provide a fair use rationale to an image/work which doesn't have a copyright??can you please help clear this confusion??thank you :) Grandia01 ( talk) 04:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
the website's terms state that only non-copyrighted images are allowed to exist on that forum website.so im pretty sure it doesn't have a copyright.is there anyway to bypass this free use rationale request?? Grandia01 ( talk) 06:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
your answer: As I said, you have to actually be able to demonstrate for sure that it's not copyright
please see the websites term's at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962 section F-4 "copyrights" that shows that images posted there can't/aren't copyrighted.robert ley's photo has been there for approx over a year without any problems.please reply if you have further concerns.hope this is proof enough Grandia01 ( talk) 06:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
just to let you know delldot,i simply followed your advice and took the fair use path.thank you so much for all your time Grandia01 ( talk) 03:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
hi delldot.just to let you know,my image has been kept after all.your advice turned out to be most useful.thank you so much :) Grandia01 ( talk) 06:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi.
I'm not sure how to withdraw my nomination from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susana A. Herrera Quezada.
Is it enough to just replace
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|O}}
with
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
or is there another step?
As always, thanks for helping.
Peace! SWik78 ( talk) 16:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Any more? Fainites barley 21:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks very much for all your help. Fainites barley 00:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
YOR.com, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
YOR.com.
Argyriou
(talk) 00:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks Delldot and i will start makeing edits Jon Crane ( talk) 23:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks for your note -- will work at getting over to the concussion page you invited me to consider.
i'm a psychiatrist-clinical epidemiologist. i work in a military setting and there's been much discussion of the impact of mild traumatic brain injury (concussion). i'm a bit of a johnny-come-lately to concussion but i've done a good bit of research (see tomorrow's new england journal of medicine for an article on mild traumatic brain injury in army troops after participating in the iraq war for the work that introduced me to concussion/mild traumatic brain injury). consequently, i know how to assess whether a statement is backed by the cited literature and i also know my limits and wouldn't go beyond them as an editor.
best, chuck engel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlescengel ( talk • contribs) 10:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I added some comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Concussion/archive1 #Review of epidemiology section. Hope they help. Eubulides ( talk) 07:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Delldot, I've only been able to do a quick review. Busy offline, and other promised favours are stacking up. Hope that is useful. If I thought the article needed a lot of work, I'd let you know. From my quick read, it looks good. Be aware I've no medical training and haven't had time to check your facts, even to the limited extent that I'm capable of. Colin° Talk 20:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
hey delldot.at [1] the photo of adolf eichmann is nominated for deletion(for no solid reason)and no one seems to bother following up on this.can you please straighten things up?? Grandia01 ( talk) 05:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I think you're awesome. That's all. In general, but specifically I thought your note to SmashTheState was very thoughtful. 24.229.203.46 ( talk) 15:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
ty for the welcome :) -- Lupus Firemane ( talk) 20:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I am trying to work on the Crohn's disease article. I came to the title Diagnosis and there is a big space there do to the pictures on the right side. I tried but couldn't get the spaces removed so that it looks like it should. Would you please make this repair for me? I would really appreciate it and I can look at the history and see how you did it so I know how to, hopefully, the next time something like this shows itself. Thanks a lot, and you can respond here or my page, it doesn't matter since I have you on my WP:watchlist. :) -- CrohnieGal Talk 13:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I figured out an easier way to make the space look more appropriate. I put more spaces in the pathophysiology section to have the picture in that section and not in between. It does two things, it tells people the one section is a stub and needs more added and it allows diagnosis to look normal. What do you think? I don't know much about pathophysiology, I can't even spell it "). But I think this might help the article when it gets attention to have the stub extended more, at least I hope so. thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 20:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks :) but so is Triona's response, though I don't agree with it... I believe that from an individual's perspective the rate of recent changes appears to be overwhelming when in fact hundreds of users may be monitoring the same list at any given time and there's a very slim chance of any vandalism slipping past. But because there are no figures to support either Triona's or my belief, our opinions will have to remain just that. I better not continue the discussion at the RfA though, because someone will probably come along soon and say "stop cluttering the RfA page with tangential discussions!" :P - Two Oars 16:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thank you I will try again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptsdprof ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome. can you point me to some pages that you think need working on?-- MilesTerrex ( talk) 12:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello again!
There should be some kind of a WP tax system set up to pay people like you for helping people like me. I'm sure I would complain if there was such a thing but it makes me sound like I actually care when I say it, doesn't it?
Just joking.
Anyways, I have a question regarding the appropriatness of some information on this article, more specifically its sources.
67.86.145.12 (
talk ·
contribs) has inserted the following line into Jaslene's article:
will also appear on the cover of Vanidades shortly
The claim, which to me sounds something that can be challenged, was referenced by a YouTube clip and a
LiveJournal entry, neither of which conform to
WP:BLP#Reliable sources. I removed the line based on the fact that it is sourced from non-reliable sources, not to mention possible copyright infringement by using the YouTube clip, but the above mentioned IP user reinserted it. I left an explanation on his talk page regarding why I did what I did and changed it again. My edit was reverted again without an explanation or an edit summary. I don't want to get involved in an edit war nor do I want to breach
WP:3RR so I need advice on how to handle this. Clearly, the user's edits are in good faith but I feel like I make a good point concerning a
WP:BLP.
This section says that Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in
Wikipedia:Verifiability. It also says The three-revert rule does not apply to such removals if the information is derogatory. I must note that the information in question is not derogatory but does not meet standards specified.
So my question is this: Should I revert the IP editor based on the above guideline in order to uphold Wikipedia's standards of verifiability or would that be considered 3RR or disruptive editing?
What is your opinion?
Thanks again.
Peace!
SWik78 (
talk) 14:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
As per usual, you are more than helpful, so thank you again. You definitely deserve this:
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
In recognition of all the help you've provided to myself and other well-meaning souls overwhelmed by Wikipedia policies and all the help you will, undoubtedly, keep providing in the future, I award you this Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar. Peace! SWik78 ( talk) 15:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC) |
Guess who!
This article is being contributed to by mostly one editor ( Brexx ( talk · contribs)) who, it seems, has contributed quite extensively to articles related to Mariah Carey and other music related articles. However, he keeps inserting a statement that says:
The music video for the song is probably completed by now,and will most likely premiere in the coming weeks.
I don't even know where to begin saying what's wrong with this, especially that it is not sourced. I left a note on the user's talk page regarding sourcing this statement if it is to stay in the article and he reinserted the statement referencing it to a really vague sentence from someone's blog.
Again, input from you would help in resolving this issue without edit warring.
Do I even need say it? Yes I do. Thanks!
Peace!
SWik78 (
talk) 18:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
she's shooting a video this fortnight for her new album
I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons.
The article contains a section titled Music Video, it contains the sentence According to The Voice, Carey has already filmed the music video. The video will most likely premiere in the coming weeks as the song hits radio stations.. SWik78 ( talk) 18:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Nice pic for Concussion, by the way. Glad to see you were able to find a free one :D -- slakr\ talk / 20:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey Delldot
Thanks you so much for your message. I must say I am still trying to get my head around Wikipedia and there is alot to learn so might have to call on your knowledge and expertise every once and while.
Thanks once again
Melis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melis81 ( talk • contribs) 10:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I use Wernabot to achive my talk page but it doesn't seem to be working. Do you know anything about this? I have tried many time to archive myself and end up just deleting. I don't understand how to archive myself and it was suggested that I use Wernabot to do it for me because I kept making a mess of trying to archive it myself. This just happens to be one of the things I can't seem to understand, sorry. Any help would be very appreciated. Thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 13:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, that's what I understood too. Should I delete the Wernabot and then figure out how to put the Misazbot on my page? I had help putting the Wernabot up, and does the archive from wernabot disappear if I do this? Sorry for being so slow about things. I'm so happy to have you as my mentor, you are so patient with me. :) -- CrohnieGal Talk 18:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I asked over at Miszabot about why it wasn't archive. Here is the response,
I had Wernabot which is no longer active. I am trying to set up Misza bot to archive my talk page but I can't seem to do it correctly. I asked for help from my mentor and it's still not working. Would you please help get this to work of my talk page for me? Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 14:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
If you look at User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo#Parameters explained you'll note that even if not specified the bot will use default values for minthreadsleft and minthreadstoarchive. Since minthreadsleft defaults to 5 and you only have 5 threads on your talk page currently, it will not archive. Your talk page meets the minimum of 2 for minthreadstoarchive but archiving these will leave less than 5 threads on the page. So to clarify, the bot will only archive if there are at least two threads older than your setting and there will be at least five threads/sections left on the page when it's done. Hope that helps. 86.21.74.40 (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Misza13"ViewsUser page Discussion Edit this page + History Unwatch Personal toolsCrohnie My talk My preferences
I deleted the extra stuff that you get when cutting and pasting. So basically, we are set. Thank you very much again. -- CrohnieGal Talk 17:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Rudget . 16:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, there's no rush at all but would you check out the article for me and honestly tell me how I am doing? I have been working on it today and yesterday so I would appreciate your input on how it looks. Thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 17:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know I nominated this for FAC. Fainites barley 21:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
hello again delldot.i totally agree with you that "it would be the original picture's copyright, not that of the website it happens to be on, that matters." besides,as i said at http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Image:Eichmann.jpg&action=history :regardless of website's policies no one can claim "copyright" to original government property. 'll revert the photo's info to its original detail.is this ok with you?? Grandia01 ( talk) 15:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the very pleasant Editor Review, it would appear from what you've said that you think I'm doing an OK job, I apprecaite you taking the time. I have absolutely no intention of making an RfA, seems like it would require much more time than I can give at present. Thanks again for the responses. -- The.Q (t) (c) 16:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to help, I will keep searching for vandalism to erase it.
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.13.124.36 ( talk) 21:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
How do you know when to archive user talk pages? Happy editing,-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 23:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, this was the first time for me to modify Wikipedia. :) In the future I'll keep such comments to the discussion page. I am a biology master's student and I have never heard about plants having neurons either. I'm sure it was an accidental fluke for the author of the sentence and it wasn't supposed to be in the plant paragraph. After stumbling upon it in the article, I just had to make a snarky/sarcastic comment about it. Just so other people wouldn't miss out on the fun. :) 195.50.223.242 ( talk) 14:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Since that Westchester article is rated low on the importance scale and it's constantly the victim of heavy vandalism, do you think it should be deleted? Just a thought. Happy editing,-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 18:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind. :-D Happy editing,-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 17:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, okay? We cool? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerunner ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
If you're up, we're having yet another IP sock attack at Spyware Doctor, this one from Special:Contributions/59.101.202.232 makin the same edit and spewing profanity in his edit summaries. May I request temporary semi-protection for this page, that would seem to end this struggle tonight and let things cool down. Thanks! Snowfire51 ( talk) 11:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear delldot, you have sent me a message accusing me of vandalising wikipedia by changing andy.rofl 's page. This is not true. Andy is my flatmate and I did it on his behalf. xo Rowan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.186.121 ( talk) 12:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I've been offered to be adopted by an experienced Wikipedian! Happy-happy joy-joy, happy-happy joy-joy!-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 00:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for delisting this. Geometry guy 00:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you :-) - It's always a pleasure to help keep wiki clean :-) Take care, friend! Scarian Call me Pat 15:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I split the page, That is not vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastertweak ( talk • contribs) 15:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, I was splitting it because it was too big, Im not used to the Wiki tags and im used to my own system of just saving back and forth but im sorry for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastertweak ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
lol thx, yeah I reported the cue bot but how do I undo the deletetion so its back to the split so people can add to it again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastertweak ( talk • contribs) 16:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for my delayed response. I think every peer review of medical articles needs to be announced on WP:MED, because many members don't seem to be monitoring the peer review page. I certainly don't, although I certainly should :-)
Before I head over to the PR page, my warmest compliments on your neurotraumatology work. When updating stroke I was struck by the large number of related articles from your hand (e.g. the intra- and extra-axial haemorrhage articles) and the care invested in them. Keep up the great work. JFW | T@lk 18:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Do you contribute to the Uncyclopedia as well?-- Padawan Animator ( talk) 23:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Why did you delete the article East Lake Academy? I used to attend the school and found it was gone and want to know why. KC109 ( talk) 01:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
hello again ms delldot.hope you're doing well.delldot at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Robert_ley.jpg it says that the image is considered for speedy deletion because a fair use rationale is not provided,why should anyone provide a fair use rationale to an image/work which doesn't have a copyright??can you please help clear this confusion??thank you :) Grandia01 ( talk) 04:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
the website's terms state that only non-copyrighted images are allowed to exist on that forum website.so im pretty sure it doesn't have a copyright.is there anyway to bypass this free use rationale request?? Grandia01 ( talk) 06:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
your answer: As I said, you have to actually be able to demonstrate for sure that it's not copyright
please see the websites term's at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962 section F-4 "copyrights" that shows that images posted there can't/aren't copyrighted.robert ley's photo has been there for approx over a year without any problems.please reply if you have further concerns.hope this is proof enough Grandia01 ( talk) 06:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
just to let you know delldot,i simply followed your advice and took the fair use path.thank you so much for all your time Grandia01 ( talk) 03:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
hi delldot.just to let you know,my image has been kept after all.your advice turned out to be most useful.thank you so much :) Grandia01 ( talk) 06:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi.
I'm not sure how to withdraw my nomination from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susana A. Herrera Quezada.
Is it enough to just replace
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|O}}
with
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
or is there another step?
As always, thanks for helping.
Peace! SWik78 ( talk) 16:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Any more? Fainites barley 21:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks very much for all your help. Fainites barley 00:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
YOR.com, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
YOR.com.
Argyriou
(talk) 00:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks Delldot and i will start makeing edits Jon Crane ( talk) 23:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks for your note -- will work at getting over to the concussion page you invited me to consider.
i'm a psychiatrist-clinical epidemiologist. i work in a military setting and there's been much discussion of the impact of mild traumatic brain injury (concussion). i'm a bit of a johnny-come-lately to concussion but i've done a good bit of research (see tomorrow's new england journal of medicine for an article on mild traumatic brain injury in army troops after participating in the iraq war for the work that introduced me to concussion/mild traumatic brain injury). consequently, i know how to assess whether a statement is backed by the cited literature and i also know my limits and wouldn't go beyond them as an editor.
best, chuck engel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlescengel ( talk • contribs) 10:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I added some comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Concussion/archive1 #Review of epidemiology section. Hope they help. Eubulides ( talk) 07:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Delldot, I've only been able to do a quick review. Busy offline, and other promised favours are stacking up. Hope that is useful. If I thought the article needed a lot of work, I'd let you know. From my quick read, it looks good. Be aware I've no medical training and haven't had time to check your facts, even to the limited extent that I'm capable of. Colin° Talk 20:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
hey delldot.at [1] the photo of adolf eichmann is nominated for deletion(for no solid reason)and no one seems to bother following up on this.can you please straighten things up?? Grandia01 ( talk) 05:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I think you're awesome. That's all. In general, but specifically I thought your note to SmashTheState was very thoughtful. 24.229.203.46 ( talk) 15:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
ty for the welcome :) -- Lupus Firemane ( talk) 20:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I am trying to work on the Crohn's disease article. I came to the title Diagnosis and there is a big space there do to the pictures on the right side. I tried but couldn't get the spaces removed so that it looks like it should. Would you please make this repair for me? I would really appreciate it and I can look at the history and see how you did it so I know how to, hopefully, the next time something like this shows itself. Thanks a lot, and you can respond here or my page, it doesn't matter since I have you on my WP:watchlist. :) -- CrohnieGal Talk 13:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I figured out an easier way to make the space look more appropriate. I put more spaces in the pathophysiology section to have the picture in that section and not in between. It does two things, it tells people the one section is a stub and needs more added and it allows diagnosis to look normal. What do you think? I don't know much about pathophysiology, I can't even spell it "). But I think this might help the article when it gets attention to have the stub extended more, at least I hope so. thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 20:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks :) but so is Triona's response, though I don't agree with it... I believe that from an individual's perspective the rate of recent changes appears to be overwhelming when in fact hundreds of users may be monitoring the same list at any given time and there's a very slim chance of any vandalism slipping past. But because there are no figures to support either Triona's or my belief, our opinions will have to remain just that. I better not continue the discussion at the RfA though, because someone will probably come along soon and say "stop cluttering the RfA page with tangential discussions!" :P - Two Oars 16:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thank you I will try again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptsdprof ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome. can you point me to some pages that you think need working on?-- MilesTerrex ( talk) 12:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello again!
There should be some kind of a WP tax system set up to pay people like you for helping people like me. I'm sure I would complain if there was such a thing but it makes me sound like I actually care when I say it, doesn't it?
Just joking.
Anyways, I have a question regarding the appropriatness of some information on this article, more specifically its sources.
67.86.145.12 (
talk ·
contribs) has inserted the following line into Jaslene's article:
will also appear on the cover of Vanidades shortly
The claim, which to me sounds something that can be challenged, was referenced by a YouTube clip and a
LiveJournal entry, neither of which conform to
WP:BLP#Reliable sources. I removed the line based on the fact that it is sourced from non-reliable sources, not to mention possible copyright infringement by using the YouTube clip, but the above mentioned IP user reinserted it. I left an explanation on his talk page regarding why I did what I did and changed it again. My edit was reverted again without an explanation or an edit summary. I don't want to get involved in an edit war nor do I want to breach
WP:3RR so I need advice on how to handle this. Clearly, the user's edits are in good faith but I feel like I make a good point concerning a
WP:BLP.
This section says that Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in
Wikipedia:Verifiability. It also says The three-revert rule does not apply to such removals if the information is derogatory. I must note that the information in question is not derogatory but does not meet standards specified.
So my question is this: Should I revert the IP editor based on the above guideline in order to uphold Wikipedia's standards of verifiability or would that be considered 3RR or disruptive editing?
What is your opinion?
Thanks again.
Peace!
SWik78 (
talk) 14:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
As per usual, you are more than helpful, so thank you again. You definitely deserve this:
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
In recognition of all the help you've provided to myself and other well-meaning souls overwhelmed by Wikipedia policies and all the help you will, undoubtedly, keep providing in the future, I award you this Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar. Peace! SWik78 ( talk) 15:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC) |
Guess who!
This article is being contributed to by mostly one editor ( Brexx ( talk · contribs)) who, it seems, has contributed quite extensively to articles related to Mariah Carey and other music related articles. However, he keeps inserting a statement that says:
The music video for the song is probably completed by now,and will most likely premiere in the coming weeks.
I don't even know where to begin saying what's wrong with this, especially that it is not sourced. I left a note on the user's talk page regarding sourcing this statement if it is to stay in the article and he reinserted the statement referencing it to a really vague sentence from someone's blog.
Again, input from you would help in resolving this issue without edit warring.
Do I even need say it? Yes I do. Thanks!
Peace!
SWik78 (
talk) 18:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
she's shooting a video this fortnight for her new album
I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons.
The article contains a section titled Music Video, it contains the sentence According to The Voice, Carey has already filmed the music video. The video will most likely premiere in the coming weeks as the song hits radio stations.. SWik78 ( talk) 18:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Nice pic for Concussion, by the way. Glad to see you were able to find a free one :D -- slakr\ talk / 20:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey Delldot
Thanks you so much for your message. I must say I am still trying to get my head around Wikipedia and there is alot to learn so might have to call on your knowledge and expertise every once and while.
Thanks once again
Melis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melis81 ( talk • contribs) 10:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I use Wernabot to achive my talk page but it doesn't seem to be working. Do you know anything about this? I have tried many time to archive myself and end up just deleting. I don't understand how to archive myself and it was suggested that I use Wernabot to do it for me because I kept making a mess of trying to archive it myself. This just happens to be one of the things I can't seem to understand, sorry. Any help would be very appreciated. Thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 13:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, that's what I understood too. Should I delete the Wernabot and then figure out how to put the Misazbot on my page? I had help putting the Wernabot up, and does the archive from wernabot disappear if I do this? Sorry for being so slow about things. I'm so happy to have you as my mentor, you are so patient with me. :) -- CrohnieGal Talk 18:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I asked over at Miszabot about why it wasn't archive. Here is the response,
I had Wernabot which is no longer active. I am trying to set up Misza bot to archive my talk page but I can't seem to do it correctly. I asked for help from my mentor and it's still not working. Would you please help get this to work of my talk page for me? Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 14:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
If you look at User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo#Parameters explained you'll note that even if not specified the bot will use default values for minthreadsleft and minthreadstoarchive. Since minthreadsleft defaults to 5 and you only have 5 threads on your talk page currently, it will not archive. Your talk page meets the minimum of 2 for minthreadstoarchive but archiving these will leave less than 5 threads on the page. So to clarify, the bot will only archive if there are at least two threads older than your setting and there will be at least five threads/sections left on the page when it's done. Hope that helps. 86.21.74.40 (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Misza13"ViewsUser page Discussion Edit this page + History Unwatch Personal toolsCrohnie My talk My preferences
I deleted the extra stuff that you get when cutting and pasting. So basically, we are set. Thank you very much again. -- CrohnieGal Talk 17:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Rudget . 16:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, there's no rush at all but would you check out the article for me and honestly tell me how I am doing? I have been working on it today and yesterday so I would appreciate your input on how it looks. Thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 17:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know I nominated this for FAC. Fainites barley 21:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |