This page 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. |
Uh huh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.159.31 ( talk) 01:16, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
EBYABE HELLO. you did make a mistake. :) its fine i shall link it to a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.121.173 ( talk) 02:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Of this edit [1] Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm SweetHeart.MonaLisa. I made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Jesse McCartney. I actually have a video clip of BUS Radio station interview of Jesse McCartney. He himself announced his full name and I have the clip link for you right here " https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L46ogMM_xB0" . I know Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people. Well I'm kinda new on editing Wikipedia page and I'll be very glad if you help me getting things right. (I know my English is horrible, hope you can understand me). Thank you! ‖‖ Mona Lisa 18:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetheart.monalisa ( talk • contribs)
Hey there, I'm new to editing, however, the article on Intelligent design (ID) which you and others keep on reverting, is highly biased, and does not meet wiki standards of:
"verifiable, do not give undue weight"
The first line claiming ID is "pseudoscience" in unverifiable, and the article throughout gives undue weight as the view itself (ID) is neither proven nor disproven.
Notice, in my edits, I preserved all the citations claiming it was "pseudoscience", while clarifying it is still a "view" nevertheless. Hence my edits are factual, and meet wiki standards.
The article still has many defects showing clear bias and "undue weight" in such a fashion as to mock the view of ID throughout.
Can you at least allow the simple edits as made, since they did not remove any citations, but merely clarified it is still contested grounds?
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.45.106.84 ( talk • contribs) July 6, 2015
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! On WikiProject Cities Maps -- Cs california ( talk) 06:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
User:Ebyabe, Hi. As you can see by this French Wikipedia page on Intelligent design (French: Dessein intelligent), they give both sides of the argument, presenting the subject in a more neutral tone. They write (translated from the French): "Intelligent design is presented as a scientific theory by its promoters, but in the scientific world it is considered as a pseudoscience, for reasons that both the internal facts of biology and also epistemological criteria cannot be rectified (the proponents of intelligent design appearing to biologists as having ignored numerous arguments, the more notable of which being the falsifiability criterion of Karl Popper)..." I am, therefore, quick to admit that the WP article on Intelligent design should at least attempt to show that ID is viewed differently by different folks, and that even if it were not a scientific theory, per se, it is still a philosophical question suggestive of something else beyond what is seen by our naked eye, and that some biochemists (i.e. Michael Behe) and physicists (i.e. Albert Einstein) have entertained that notion as a real possibility, given all their scientific experience. Do you think that it would be possible for us to incorporate something along the lines of the French article into our own English article, and to admit that there is a philosophical question that has been the subject of debate (or of mere musings) by some respected people of the scientific community? Davidbena ( talk) 22:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
I see that you have edited the Tampa, Florida article. So if you are interested you could atleast take a look at the article about Oba Chandler. I have invested quite some time editing it over the years. Thanks :)-- BabbaQ ( talk) 17:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Doubt | |
Ebyabe Hello, I'm sending this test message because I do not know very well use the wikipedia messages box. Do you have another means of contact to an email, for example? But I'd like to talk to you and take some questions. Thank you in advance for your attention and I will be waiting. (And you can delete it later if I'm doing something wrong. Sorry!) Japn ( talk) 20:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hi E. If you like offbeat films from France then this is worth a look. Much better than the dramahz that goes on here. Cheers. MarnetteD| Talk 22:20, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Listen I don't mean to bother you again, but I really think this has to stop at this moment. I just want to edit in peace on my own when i edit, it's just not right following users around and undoing there edits when they are editing. All I'm trying to do is provide sources in articles when I'm editing, I know I did make some mistakes for not providing a source for the information I added, But I learned not to forget next time, and I don't mean to forget. I'm just saying it's not right to do this when someone is editing an article after all there hard work they put in it. I'm not being rude or mean about this, I'm just saying in my thoughts that it's not really that right to do this to other users on wikipedia. You can remove this message if you want, but I already know you won't listen to this message I wrote, and ignore it too. I'm not being rude or mean at all, I'm just giving out my own thoughts. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:00, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to forget on purpose, I'm doing the best I can. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Deaf ears yourself. I'm telling you the truth, I have short term memory issues. That's why I keep forgetting what I do, but I don't mean too. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:18, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Then I should have never edited those articles in the first place and you would have never followed me too those articles. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:25, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could help me on how to make a new wikipedia page that will not redirect to another one.
please help. Will appreciate it. Zine ntleks ( talk) 10:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
You know, except on rare occasions, I don't edit on the non-English Wikipedias. That's because I know I'm not competent enough in other languages to make constructive edits. I just wish other people would have the same level of self-awareness. Also that when they do the same things under other user identities, people won't figure it out. There's some definition that seems apropos... :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Welfare State ‖ 03:39, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. FYI, User:HardstyleGB's apparent edit warring is being discussed at [2]. LjL ( talk) 22:04, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Dasgourav7 ( talk) 04:20, 2 August 2015 (UTC) Hi Ebyabe, What I did or edited to the profile named Ayeza Khan is very true and verified and also sourced. So, I request you to do not remove or undo it, please.
Hi, you advised me on this page to discuss on the talk page. Actually, I've been doing that. Please feel free to join rather than adding to the edit war just for the sake of it. 80.44.64.116 ( talk) 03:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Re: the troll on my talk page, that's actually a sock puppet I think. Gonna file an SPI. Thanks for reverting though. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 00:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Your photo of Wild Heron at National Register of Historic Places listings in Chatham County, Georgia, for instance, does not match the house in the NRHP photos. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
I like getting under-bridge shots when I can, 'cause I think it's interesting to see the support structure. And I couldn't remember, so I checked the pictures. It was 4 months after dropping in the river that the camera finally phased out. So I was lucky there. What I recall more after the wet camera incident was taking my sneakers off and putting them on the dashboard to dry in the sun, since I didn't have a spare pair with me. Another thing I learned to have on hand after that, doncha know. :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Health and Welfare ‖ 05:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Planing NHRP photo trips is fun. I plan that I can hit these counties if I go this route, these counties if I go a different route, etc. I started with ones close by. Then I made some trips that I could make in a few hours. And some trips I'm going somewhere anyway, and get things in the area or along the way. I've about run out of stuff that I can do without staying overnight, but I've got a couple of overnight trips in my mind. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 23:05, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey there,
I noticed your signature is no longer showing up on mobile devices as it contains depricated HTML elements, however this is easily fixed. Can I suggest you change your signiture code to --<span style="color:#111111;">‖ [[User:Ebyabe|Ebyabe]] <sup>[[User talk:Ebyabe|talk]]</sup> - <small>[[Special:Contributions/Ebyabe|<span style="cursor:help;">''General Health''</span>]]</small></span> ‖
, giving --‖
Ebyabe
talk -
General Health ‖ (the same result as before). Thanks,
Mdann52 (
talk) 16:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I can provide you with any graphics regarding NHL Maple that you could possible dream up. Please do ask if opportunity arise.
Kindest regards, Romeo Murray Romeo murrey ( talk) 02:47, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome (for the thanks). I wonder if User:Faizan(Actor) should actually be deleted as promotional, if it is similar to their deleted BLP page? 220 of Borg 03:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Uh huh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.159.31 ( talk) 01:16, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
EBYABE HELLO. you did make a mistake. :) its fine i shall link it to a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.121.173 ( talk) 02:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Of this edit [1] Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm SweetHeart.MonaLisa. I made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Jesse McCartney. I actually have a video clip of BUS Radio station interview of Jesse McCartney. He himself announced his full name and I have the clip link for you right here " https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L46ogMM_xB0" . I know Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people. Well I'm kinda new on editing Wikipedia page and I'll be very glad if you help me getting things right. (I know my English is horrible, hope you can understand me). Thank you! ‖‖ Mona Lisa 18:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetheart.monalisa ( talk • contribs)
Hey there, I'm new to editing, however, the article on Intelligent design (ID) which you and others keep on reverting, is highly biased, and does not meet wiki standards of:
"verifiable, do not give undue weight"
The first line claiming ID is "pseudoscience" in unverifiable, and the article throughout gives undue weight as the view itself (ID) is neither proven nor disproven.
Notice, in my edits, I preserved all the citations claiming it was "pseudoscience", while clarifying it is still a "view" nevertheless. Hence my edits are factual, and meet wiki standards.
The article still has many defects showing clear bias and "undue weight" in such a fashion as to mock the view of ID throughout.
Can you at least allow the simple edits as made, since they did not remove any citations, but merely clarified it is still contested grounds?
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.45.106.84 ( talk • contribs) July 6, 2015
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! On WikiProject Cities Maps -- Cs california ( talk) 06:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
User:Ebyabe, Hi. As you can see by this French Wikipedia page on Intelligent design (French: Dessein intelligent), they give both sides of the argument, presenting the subject in a more neutral tone. They write (translated from the French): "Intelligent design is presented as a scientific theory by its promoters, but in the scientific world it is considered as a pseudoscience, for reasons that both the internal facts of biology and also epistemological criteria cannot be rectified (the proponents of intelligent design appearing to biologists as having ignored numerous arguments, the more notable of which being the falsifiability criterion of Karl Popper)..." I am, therefore, quick to admit that the WP article on Intelligent design should at least attempt to show that ID is viewed differently by different folks, and that even if it were not a scientific theory, per se, it is still a philosophical question suggestive of something else beyond what is seen by our naked eye, and that some biochemists (i.e. Michael Behe) and physicists (i.e. Albert Einstein) have entertained that notion as a real possibility, given all their scientific experience. Do you think that it would be possible for us to incorporate something along the lines of the French article into our own English article, and to admit that there is a philosophical question that has been the subject of debate (or of mere musings) by some respected people of the scientific community? Davidbena ( talk) 22:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
I see that you have edited the Tampa, Florida article. So if you are interested you could atleast take a look at the article about Oba Chandler. I have invested quite some time editing it over the years. Thanks :)-- BabbaQ ( talk) 17:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Doubt | |
Ebyabe Hello, I'm sending this test message because I do not know very well use the wikipedia messages box. Do you have another means of contact to an email, for example? But I'd like to talk to you and take some questions. Thank you in advance for your attention and I will be waiting. (And you can delete it later if I'm doing something wrong. Sorry!) Japn ( talk) 20:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hi E. If you like offbeat films from France then this is worth a look. Much better than the dramahz that goes on here. Cheers. MarnetteD| Talk 22:20, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Listen I don't mean to bother you again, but I really think this has to stop at this moment. I just want to edit in peace on my own when i edit, it's just not right following users around and undoing there edits when they are editing. All I'm trying to do is provide sources in articles when I'm editing, I know I did make some mistakes for not providing a source for the information I added, But I learned not to forget next time, and I don't mean to forget. I'm just saying it's not right to do this when someone is editing an article after all there hard work they put in it. I'm not being rude or mean about this, I'm just saying in my thoughts that it's not really that right to do this to other users on wikipedia. You can remove this message if you want, but I already know you won't listen to this message I wrote, and ignore it too. I'm not being rude or mean at all, I'm just giving out my own thoughts. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:00, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to forget on purpose, I'm doing the best I can. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Deaf ears yourself. I'm telling you the truth, I have short term memory issues. That's why I keep forgetting what I do, but I don't mean too. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:18, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Then I should have never edited those articles in the first place and you would have never followed me too those articles. FrozenFan2 ( talk) 03:25, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could help me on how to make a new wikipedia page that will not redirect to another one.
please help. Will appreciate it. Zine ntleks ( talk) 10:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
You know, except on rare occasions, I don't edit on the non-English Wikipedias. That's because I know I'm not competent enough in other languages to make constructive edits. I just wish other people would have the same level of self-awareness. Also that when they do the same things under other user identities, people won't figure it out. There's some definition that seems apropos... :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Welfare State ‖ 03:39, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. FYI, User:HardstyleGB's apparent edit warring is being discussed at [2]. LjL ( talk) 22:04, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Dasgourav7 ( talk) 04:20, 2 August 2015 (UTC) Hi Ebyabe, What I did or edited to the profile named Ayeza Khan is very true and verified and also sourced. So, I request you to do not remove or undo it, please.
Hi, you advised me on this page to discuss on the talk page. Actually, I've been doing that. Please feel free to join rather than adding to the edit war just for the sake of it. 80.44.64.116 ( talk) 03:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Re: the troll on my talk page, that's actually a sock puppet I think. Gonna file an SPI. Thanks for reverting though. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 00:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Your photo of Wild Heron at National Register of Historic Places listings in Chatham County, Georgia, for instance, does not match the house in the NRHP photos. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
I like getting under-bridge shots when I can, 'cause I think it's interesting to see the support structure. And I couldn't remember, so I checked the pictures. It was 4 months after dropping in the river that the camera finally phased out. So I was lucky there. What I recall more after the wet camera incident was taking my sneakers off and putting them on the dashboard to dry in the sun, since I didn't have a spare pair with me. Another thing I learned to have on hand after that, doncha know. :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Health and Welfare ‖ 05:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Planing NHRP photo trips is fun. I plan that I can hit these counties if I go this route, these counties if I go a different route, etc. I started with ones close by. Then I made some trips that I could make in a few hours. And some trips I'm going somewhere anyway, and get things in the area or along the way. I've about run out of stuff that I can do without staying overnight, but I've got a couple of overnight trips in my mind. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 23:05, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey there,
I noticed your signature is no longer showing up on mobile devices as it contains depricated HTML elements, however this is easily fixed. Can I suggest you change your signiture code to --<span style="color:#111111;">‖ [[User:Ebyabe|Ebyabe]] <sup>[[User talk:Ebyabe|talk]]</sup> - <small>[[Special:Contributions/Ebyabe|<span style="cursor:help;">''General Health''</span>]]</small></span> ‖
, giving --‖
Ebyabe
talk -
General Health ‖ (the same result as before). Thanks,
Mdann52 (
talk) 16:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I can provide you with any graphics regarding NHL Maple that you could possible dream up. Please do ask if opportunity arise.
Kindest regards, Romeo Murray Romeo murrey ( talk) 02:47, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome (for the thanks). I wonder if User:Faizan(Actor) should actually be deleted as promotional, if it is similar to their deleted BLP page? 220 of Borg 03:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)