![]() | 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. |
Please see WP:CSD#A1 We do not use it for short and unsatisfactory articles--we only use it for articles so short and unsatisfactory that it is impossible to tell what the subject is about. An article on list of prisons in a particular country may be incomplete, or unsourced, or have other problems, but it's clear what the subject is. DGG ( talk ) 00:28, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a
Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in
Park Avenue Tunnel, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
MOS:DAB is pretty explicit that a disambiguation page is just a brief entry and contains no links except the main one.
DMacks (
talk)
02:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 18:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi .. I know you have special interest in NYC subways. Could you perhaps check "( 4, 6, and <6> trains)" at 72nd Street (Manhattan) and East 74th Street (it appears the same elsewhere)? It doesn't look right to me as it suggests the 4 train stops at those local stops, but you would likely know. Tx.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 04:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Tentinator. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Kaydee "Caine" Lawson, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. ♦ Tentinator ♦ 14:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Still not sure how much this is needed. Yes,omitting it would make it different than other PATH stations, but Newark Penn is inherently different from other PATH stations by its nature. Also, even with it there, there's a few problems with it. Firstly, the platforms for tracks A and 1 are not shorter on the east end than the ones for the other tracks, so the layout is inaccurate. Secondly, and this is a big one, the use of color, especially red, for links is depreciated severely, as it makes the link look like a link to a non-existent article. That has to be changed. oknazevad ( talk) 01:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if there has been any misunderstanding. Epicgenius ( talk) 01:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Just so you know, there's been some recent discussion about using the rail line color template at WT:TRAINS#Template:Rail text color. oknazevad ( talk) 15:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
You recently tried to nominate this article at WP:FAC. You have opened the link on the talkpage, but have not initiated the nomination. You need to do this, to get the nom recognised on the FAC page; use the redlink on the article's talkpage, and follow the instructions there. Then add the article to the FAC page listing. As you are not a major contributor to the article, you will need to get the agreement of its principal editors to the nomination. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Brian provided some helpful advice above. Not sure why you have instead initiated another nomination, on another article to which you are not a significant contributor ( Futurama). Please read the featured article instructions. FAC is a collaborative process; a nominator needs to be intimately familiar with the article's content and sources in order to respond to the feedback of multiple reviewers. I have undone the nomination on both article talk pages. Please add a {{ db-author}} tag to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Futurama/archive2 to have the page deleted. If you have any questions about the FAC instructions, please leave a note on my talk page. Maralia ( talk) 16:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
The Saudi individual in the Marathon bombing is already covered in the investigation section of the article. The sources used there are better (Washington Post & NYTimes vs Daily Mail). GabrielF ( talk) 20:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Idiot, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Fool and Moron ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 01:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your watchlist. You will find many interesting things there. Vcohen ( talk) 14:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Please don't make page moves contrary to WP:ENGVAR, and please use proper technique ( WP:MOVE) instead of cut-and-paste. Slav Defense is the example I have in mind. Quale ( talk) 20:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Your decision to unilaterally make the article St. Mark's Place into 8th Street/St. Mark's Place was an exceeding poor one. Despite the fact that they take up the same position on the grid, the two streets have different characters. Additionally, the resulting article in 90% about St. Marks with a few bits and pieces about 8th Street thrown in. Also, Greenwich Avenue is NOT a continuation of 8th Street - there are no examples in Manhattan of a "Street" turning into an "Avenue", and Greenwich goes off at an angle. In point of fact, 8th Street stops at Astor Place (NOT Third Avenue) and St. Mark's starts on the other side of Astor Place, making them two different streets. (The streets signs there will confirm that.)
You've made such a mess of things, that I've only done some absolutely necessary cleanup, and am not -- at this time -- asking that the move be reverted (although anyone reading this who agrees that the move was a bad one who wants to put it back, you've got my agreement). I think that, considering how poor your judgment was in making this move, and given the quality of some of your other edits and suggestions that I am aware of, in the future you should not move any articles without first getting a consensus to do so on the talk page from editors who have better sense. Please don't make this kind of mess again. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I notice both our GA nominations are chess-related, do you want to do something a little unusual, and review each other's articles? If I start my review on yours, would you review my Falko Bindrich article? Cheerio, ChessFiends ( talk) 13:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
* On which page am I going to replace the template? The talk page for the article, or the GAN list itself? Epicgenius( talk to me • see my contributions) 19:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Why are you making an inconsistent physical mess out of the Checkmate article?? Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 15:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Fylbecatulous. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, MicaGrace O'Dwyer, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Fylbecatulous talk 12:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
You recently added a list of all of the intersections on 59th Street, along with whether or not they have traffic lights. I think that this kind of list is too detailed, impossible to maintain, and impossible to verify through reliable sources. It amounts to WP:Original research, and I have removed it from the article. In the future, I strongly encourage you to support your additions to articles with references to WP:Reliable sources. Pburka ( talk) 14:44, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
One again you demonstrate your poor judgement. Please stop adding list of intersections to Manhattan street articles. They may be factually correct, but they're hardly encyclopedic. I asked you to stop editing in this area because your knowledge is not as good os you think it is, yet you continue. Again, I ask you, please stop, Your edits are becoming disruptive. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 21:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Please consider using the minor edit tag more judiciously. Several of your recent minor edits have made substantial changes to articles. See WP:MINOR for a description of how the tag is intended to be used. Pburka ( talk) 14:10, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
You're still misusing the minor edit tag and you've been warned about this before. If you continue to make use deceptive minor tags I will move to have you temporarily blocked. Pburka ( talk) 00:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Dude, stop ticking minor edits. [13] [14] [15] Edits that add any sort of content, should not be considered minor. ChessFiends ( talk) 01:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
There is no reason for a hatnote distringuishing a major street in Chicago from an unknown 2-block street in Manhattan. Please THINK before you edit. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:07, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Alg-51st-queens-jpeg.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pburka ( talk) 00:40, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
You tagged United States v. Kincade for disputed accuracy and for not having a global world view. The article is about United States case law; it should not need a "global" view, as long as the context is properly understood. (In a sense, it does have global view, as it is explicatory of United States law to anyone in the world who chooses to read it.) And the facts in the case are all cited to a law text; what is your dispute with their accuracy? WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 15:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Just a reminder that it is a violation of the sockpuppetry policy to edit logged out with an IP with the intent of avoiding scrutiny of your edits. This is apparently what you did with User:67.220.154.178. Please don't do it again. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 02:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello.
In this section, I've raised the topic of one of your recent edits. In particular, you didn't even seem to notice all those other lists! Michael Hardy ( talk) 02:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Epicgenius, please stop changing the layout at List of vegetarians and List of vegans. We need shorter sections for ease of editing, and in List of vegans the United States names still have to be merged, so the sections will get even longer. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Where are you getting the widths and lengths of streets that you are adding to articles? What is your source? If you are somehow measuring themselves, say via Google Maps, please be aware that this would be a violation of our policy against original research. You can look at a map and say that a street is three block long (or whatever), but you cannot use the map's measuring device to say that it is 75 feet wide and 200 feet long. Please refrain from adding this data to articles without a citation from a reliable source to back it up.
Also, if you are also using Google Maps to judge the beginnings and ends streets, that is OK, but you should be aware that maps are not always as clear as they seem to be. Fifth Avenue, for instance, does not connect to the Harlem River Drive, and therefore does not end there -- as you put into the article -- but at 143rd Street.
Once again, you must be smarter in your editing. This is not a game we're playing here, for accumulating awards or making lists of our accomplishments, we're supposed to be building an accurate encyclopedia. Too many of your edits have been mistaken in too many ways for my comfort, and you must be better at it. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 01:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to
Naka-Okachimachi Station, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with
Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the
reversion of clear-cut
vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --
DAJF (
talk)
23:06, 29 April 2013 (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. |
Please see WP:CSD#A1 We do not use it for short and unsatisfactory articles--we only use it for articles so short and unsatisfactory that it is impossible to tell what the subject is about. An article on list of prisons in a particular country may be incomplete, or unsourced, or have other problems, but it's clear what the subject is. DGG ( talk ) 00:28, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a
Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in
Park Avenue Tunnel, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
MOS:DAB is pretty explicit that a disambiguation page is just a brief entry and contains no links except the main one.
DMacks (
talk)
02:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 18:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi .. I know you have special interest in NYC subways. Could you perhaps check "( 4, 6, and <6> trains)" at 72nd Street (Manhattan) and East 74th Street (it appears the same elsewhere)? It doesn't look right to me as it suggests the 4 train stops at those local stops, but you would likely know. Tx.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 04:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Tentinator. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Kaydee "Caine" Lawson, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. ♦ Tentinator ♦ 14:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Still not sure how much this is needed. Yes,omitting it would make it different than other PATH stations, but Newark Penn is inherently different from other PATH stations by its nature. Also, even with it there, there's a few problems with it. Firstly, the platforms for tracks A and 1 are not shorter on the east end than the ones for the other tracks, so the layout is inaccurate. Secondly, and this is a big one, the use of color, especially red, for links is depreciated severely, as it makes the link look like a link to a non-existent article. That has to be changed. oknazevad ( talk) 01:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if there has been any misunderstanding. Epicgenius ( talk) 01:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Just so you know, there's been some recent discussion about using the rail line color template at WT:TRAINS#Template:Rail text color. oknazevad ( talk) 15:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
You recently tried to nominate this article at WP:FAC. You have opened the link on the talkpage, but have not initiated the nomination. You need to do this, to get the nom recognised on the FAC page; use the redlink on the article's talkpage, and follow the instructions there. Then add the article to the FAC page listing. As you are not a major contributor to the article, you will need to get the agreement of its principal editors to the nomination. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Brian provided some helpful advice above. Not sure why you have instead initiated another nomination, on another article to which you are not a significant contributor ( Futurama). Please read the featured article instructions. FAC is a collaborative process; a nominator needs to be intimately familiar with the article's content and sources in order to respond to the feedback of multiple reviewers. I have undone the nomination on both article talk pages. Please add a {{ db-author}} tag to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Futurama/archive2 to have the page deleted. If you have any questions about the FAC instructions, please leave a note on my talk page. Maralia ( talk) 16:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
The Saudi individual in the Marathon bombing is already covered in the investigation section of the article. The sources used there are better (Washington Post & NYTimes vs Daily Mail). GabrielF ( talk) 20:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Idiot, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Fool and Moron ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 01:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your watchlist. You will find many interesting things there. Vcohen ( talk) 14:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Please don't make page moves contrary to WP:ENGVAR, and please use proper technique ( WP:MOVE) instead of cut-and-paste. Slav Defense is the example I have in mind. Quale ( talk) 20:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Your decision to unilaterally make the article St. Mark's Place into 8th Street/St. Mark's Place was an exceeding poor one. Despite the fact that they take up the same position on the grid, the two streets have different characters. Additionally, the resulting article in 90% about St. Marks with a few bits and pieces about 8th Street thrown in. Also, Greenwich Avenue is NOT a continuation of 8th Street - there are no examples in Manhattan of a "Street" turning into an "Avenue", and Greenwich goes off at an angle. In point of fact, 8th Street stops at Astor Place (NOT Third Avenue) and St. Mark's starts on the other side of Astor Place, making them two different streets. (The streets signs there will confirm that.)
You've made such a mess of things, that I've only done some absolutely necessary cleanup, and am not -- at this time -- asking that the move be reverted (although anyone reading this who agrees that the move was a bad one who wants to put it back, you've got my agreement). I think that, considering how poor your judgment was in making this move, and given the quality of some of your other edits and suggestions that I am aware of, in the future you should not move any articles without first getting a consensus to do so on the talk page from editors who have better sense. Please don't make this kind of mess again. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I notice both our GA nominations are chess-related, do you want to do something a little unusual, and review each other's articles? If I start my review on yours, would you review my Falko Bindrich article? Cheerio, ChessFiends ( talk) 13:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
* On which page am I going to replace the template? The talk page for the article, or the GAN list itself? Epicgenius( talk to me • see my contributions) 19:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Why are you making an inconsistent physical mess out of the Checkmate article?? Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 15:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Fylbecatulous. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, MicaGrace O'Dwyer, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Fylbecatulous talk 12:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
You recently added a list of all of the intersections on 59th Street, along with whether or not they have traffic lights. I think that this kind of list is too detailed, impossible to maintain, and impossible to verify through reliable sources. It amounts to WP:Original research, and I have removed it from the article. In the future, I strongly encourage you to support your additions to articles with references to WP:Reliable sources. Pburka ( talk) 14:44, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
One again you demonstrate your poor judgement. Please stop adding list of intersections to Manhattan street articles. They may be factually correct, but they're hardly encyclopedic. I asked you to stop editing in this area because your knowledge is not as good os you think it is, yet you continue. Again, I ask you, please stop, Your edits are becoming disruptive. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 21:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Please consider using the minor edit tag more judiciously. Several of your recent minor edits have made substantial changes to articles. See WP:MINOR for a description of how the tag is intended to be used. Pburka ( talk) 14:10, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
You're still misusing the minor edit tag and you've been warned about this before. If you continue to make use deceptive minor tags I will move to have you temporarily blocked. Pburka ( talk) 00:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Dude, stop ticking minor edits. [13] [14] [15] Edits that add any sort of content, should not be considered minor. ChessFiends ( talk) 01:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
There is no reason for a hatnote distringuishing a major street in Chicago from an unknown 2-block street in Manhattan. Please THINK before you edit. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:07, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Alg-51st-queens-jpeg.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pburka ( talk) 00:40, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
You tagged United States v. Kincade for disputed accuracy and for not having a global world view. The article is about United States case law; it should not need a "global" view, as long as the context is properly understood. (In a sense, it does have global view, as it is explicatory of United States law to anyone in the world who chooses to read it.) And the facts in the case are all cited to a law text; what is your dispute with their accuracy? WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 15:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Just a reminder that it is a violation of the sockpuppetry policy to edit logged out with an IP with the intent of avoiding scrutiny of your edits. This is apparently what you did with User:67.220.154.178. Please don't do it again. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 02:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello.
In this section, I've raised the topic of one of your recent edits. In particular, you didn't even seem to notice all those other lists! Michael Hardy ( talk) 02:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Epicgenius, please stop changing the layout at List of vegetarians and List of vegans. We need shorter sections for ease of editing, and in List of vegans the United States names still have to be merged, so the sections will get even longer. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Where are you getting the widths and lengths of streets that you are adding to articles? What is your source? If you are somehow measuring themselves, say via Google Maps, please be aware that this would be a violation of our policy against original research. You can look at a map and say that a street is three block long (or whatever), but you cannot use the map's measuring device to say that it is 75 feet wide and 200 feet long. Please refrain from adding this data to articles without a citation from a reliable source to back it up.
Also, if you are also using Google Maps to judge the beginnings and ends streets, that is OK, but you should be aware that maps are not always as clear as they seem to be. Fifth Avenue, for instance, does not connect to the Harlem River Drive, and therefore does not end there -- as you put into the article -- but at 143rd Street.
Once again, you must be smarter in your editing. This is not a game we're playing here, for accumulating awards or making lists of our accomplishments, we're supposed to be building an accurate encyclopedia. Too many of your edits have been mistaken in too many ways for my comfort, and you must be better at it. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 01:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to
Naka-Okachimachi Station, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with
Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the
reversion of clear-cut
vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --
DAJF (
talk)
23:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)