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 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 13 |
Unproductive discussions with user attempting to justify ignoring WP:MOSBIO |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Moving towards a third opinionI started a discussion on the Fermi-Dirac statistics. If you don't participate, I will follow the third opinion procedure: consider applying to the WP:AN/I noticeboard (see WP:3RR for further guidance). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 07:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC) The Creation of Wave Mechanics; Early Response and Applications 1925-1926, page 767, Springer. Read it now! Fermi was the first... Now I should really follow all the changes you make, and ask for the sources, and not only the sources, I want the title of the book and the page!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 15:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC) Joe SatrianiHe is mentioned in many other pages as Italian - American. So either you adapt all others wiki pages, or you change back this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 08:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
My daughter was made in Germany, born in Taipei, and she is Italian!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 01:51, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Frank SinatraBoth parents were Italian, what do you need more to be Italian??? He grew up in an Italian family, with Italian education style at home (which is the most important thing)....I really don't understand.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 09:02, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
He was born in USA, not in America. America is a continent going from Canada to Chile... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 01:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course, you didn't write USA, you wrote American....that is why American is not correct. You should have written US people... and the name America derives by the way by Amerigo Vespucci...check where was born... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC) I would like to know the following: - who are you to decide what is correct and what it is wrong? - than try to convince someone from South America that American means someone coming from USA. - last but not the least, Wikipedia defines these people as Italian-American, either you change the definition of Italian-American, or you accept my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I have the same feeling about you. I based my knowledge not on common usage, but on logic... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Italian-AmericanSince it seems "you work" for Wikipedia, I hope you agree with what you write. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_American In my opinion you must be consistent, so either you change the definition in that page, or you change back what I wrote...Moreover, I don't understand who are you to delete my changes....The definition of Italian-American is quite clear, and it cannot be misunderstood... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 02:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
If you act consequently, you should go to change that page too...otherwise you are making something inconsistent... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Federico FagginWhere did you get the information that Faggin does not have the italian passport any longer? As far as I know, you can hold both passports, and since man was in Italy till ca 25 years, he is at least Italian.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Riccardo GiacconiAccording to what you wrote, this scientist is Italian too. Born in Italy, studied in Italy, he holds an Italian passport. This contradicts what you previously wrote... Please change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC) In the reference reported (n.1) there no sign of US citizenship acquired, and he has definitely the Italian one. Since you can hold both, what I wrote it is correct. So let me know who is now the ignorant, the one who writes about fact, or the one who doesn't want to listen too. If you don't answer, I will escalate this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Fermi-DiracIf Fat&Happy besides deleting everything I write, had spent some time to read the whole article, it would not appear so ignorant. In fact what I added, it is written few lines after....Just take some time, read, and you can learn something. I am going to find the original papers for you, afterwards I hope that in front of the evidence you will stop bothering me.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 02:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC) So I found. The number 3 in italian publication indicates the month (i.e. March). Since Dirac published in October of the same year, I hope you can agree that October follows March. Correct? ;-). Moreover, Fermi first published it in Italian, BUT some English scientist, more and less when Dirac was going to publish his work, were already aware of Fermi work. Search for "Thomas-Fermi"....I hope you finally stop bothering me, assuming you are the only intelligent one.. Moreover, you didn't wonder why the particles of this statistics are called Fermi's particles, the energy level, Fermi's levels, and so on and so forth....Why didn't they call Dirac's particles, or Dirac's energy? Why? Fermi published the work (still before Dirac) also in German... Fermi, E. (1926). Zur Quantelung des idealen einatomigen Gases Zeitschrift für Physik, 36 (11-12), 902-912 DOI: 10.1007/BF01400221 I am annoyed by you behaviourTherefore I will escalate this issue. Someone has to stop your dictatorial behaviour. What you wrote is a point-of-view as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 05:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
See here. Just so no one violates the 3RR over this. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Given the general public heard the term 501 and colbert unfortunately keeps calling his PAC a 501...I have elected a compromise
This route involves forming one firm, that is usually a 501 (c) non-profit, or 527 organization so the donation can be tax deductible, and then the PAC to receive them. The scheme, commonly known as a "money loop" or "money trail", was detailed in the New York Times, and attracted the attention of the IRS in 2010, and the IRS subsequently advised big donors their tax deductions were questionable.[46]
I have on my to do list to rewrite the 527 page since it really isn't easy to understand why they are different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbmaise ( talk • contribs) 23:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
why do u insist on correcting everything that you feel is right. Let me tell you something you are not always right and you seem to spend too much time editing wikipedia perhaps you should find something more productive to do than edit the worlds must un reliable website that seems to be unreliable because of people like you messing it up and not listening to others who actually have more knowledge than you on the matter because their fans or are of that area a specialist. Tell me cos i am keen to know where you get your supposed knowledge from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.124.76.227 ( talk) 20:14, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Fat&Happy, over the weekend an editor named TimothyHorrigan made an edit that I believe is vandalism to the Political positions of Newt Gingrich article, in the "Same-sex marriage" section. This is not the first time that Horrigan has made a similar change, and the last time you reverted his edit. I wonder if you would mind taking a look at this most recent edit and undo it if you agree this is reasonable? Thanks, Joe DeSantis Communications Director, Gingrich 2012 ( talk) 00:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello.
Please stop introducing redirects into the article of Jayne Mansfield. The fact that they are not broken is not a reason for introducing them. Introducing redirects will lead to worse performance – as an extra access is required for the linked page – as well as decreased navigability.
If you do it again, I will have to report you to 3rr or WP:AN/I.
Cheers
HandsomeFella ( talk) 09:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
… adding Rick Santorum's age, without so much as even a comment to explain why. Why? — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 23:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I hadn't thought to look at the Ron Paul page edit log. Thank you — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 14:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
If you have the time, would you mind offering an opinion regarding reliable sources and the attribution of opinions and statements provided by Warren Commission critics? Thanks! Location ( talk) 01:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
The Graphic Designer's Barnstar | |
I love the Black Eyed Peas band!! they are so awesome!!!! Sweet&snazzy101 ( talk) 00:50, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi F&H. Can you please elaborate on the talk page on why you removed the same content three times in like three hours. I think the 1RR rule regarding Arab-Israel topics should apply here, but even if not, your treading far too closely to violating our general edit-warring rules. It would probably be best if you self-reverted pending some sort of explanation on the talk page. Thanks, -- brew crewer (yada, yada) 18:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
All articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict broadly construed are under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). When in doubt, assume it is related.
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Reverts of edits made by anonymous IP editors that are not vandalism are exempt from 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring.
Editors who otherwise violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
After being warned, any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process may be blocked up to one year, topic-banned, further revert-restricted, or otherwise restricted from editing.
Best Wishes
AnkhMorpork (
talk) 19:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Your thoughts please
Best Wishes
AnkhMorpork (
talk) 13:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi FH, before you disappear, I have one question about the content of the section "Screen Persona." You may recall that Lobo 5something-or-other thought that the repeated motif of the "I want to be alone" line in so many of her pictures was misplaced in the "Queen of MGM" section and put it a section she created called "Personal life." I rejected the idea, we discussed the matter for a while, and she came up with the idea of creating a new section, "Screen Persona," in which to put it, which I agreed to. But now, I've been considering whether or not it belongs in separate section with that title. Her persona, I think, is much more complex than just "I want to be alone." I'm not up for writing about her screen persona in a section, aspects of which are woven throughout the article. So I'm inclined to put this stuff back into "Queen of MGM." I'm interested in your thoughts on the matter. Thanks for your time, -- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 18:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
One more brief thing. Can you look at the most recent edit, made by ERJANIK, and tell me if you ustand who it is (why red?) and what the revision is exactly? Gracias,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 19:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Hey man, well I guess that's about it for a while. I've pretty much exhausted my knowledge and writing skills. Though it's really strange how, out of the blue, I'll think of a word, or a phrase, or something to adjust or add. Just Randomly comes to me. So I'll probably continue tweaking. I'm assuming you approve of the repositioning and rewording of the personae stuff. I know you'll be happy I added citations for G's depression and moodiness. You've been a superlative editor as I'm sure you are with all the writers you work with. I'll miss having you around because you've become a friend of sorts. We've been working on this thing since the end of July. Unless you find other stuff that needs to be adjusted. My name, btw, is Annie. Take care,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I've not responded earlier. I've had some real-life things to take care of, and sloughed off WP somewhat for a while.
Hah! I see you just couldn't give up cold turkey; one of the early-warning signs of addiction. How extensively are you planning on re-doing the de Acosta article?
Talk page archiving: The simple manual way is to create a new page named User talk:Classicfilmbuff/Archive 1, then just edit both pages, cut/pasting from one to the other. Your page doesn't seem active enough to warrant setting it up to be done automatically by a robot script. Or you could just delete old stuff (especially the notice from the disambiguation bot); after all, it can always be retrieved by accessing old versions from the history page. Fat&Happy ( talk) 03:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Hey man, who the hell is pixiebot (see history p.) His name (talk p.) is Rich. I queried him about how he finds these minUTE things, like where hyphens should go in isbn numbers, and corrects them! I wrote him on his page asking a series of questions. But I'm interested in your thoughts. Is he "watching" this page? Fascinating!-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 21:52, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
Citation needed|date=March 2012}}
. The program's author (Rich, I guess) apparently changed it recently to also scan articles and properly hyphenate ISBN numbers. (Irritating little thing; I thought I had gone through and done that correctly on Garbo a while ago, but it found two that I missed which had been previously formatted incorrectly and fixed them...) It's been making those changes to a lot of articles for, maybe, a couple of weeks now. (I do wish though, that it would convert old ISBN 10-digit numbers to the current 13-digit versions while it's at it; It's pretty much a matter of prepending "978-" and mathematically recalculating the last digit as a
check digit.)
Fat&Happy (
talk) 22:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)ALSO. I see the p. now has 130 watchers. Who are these peopl and why are they watching the page? 2nd, weird thing. I checked into the ratings and they've all been deleted (there were about 25 when I last checked) except the writing which is rated 5.0 (doesn't ring true) with something like 35 raters. Weird breakdown of system? Flummoxed, as usual,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC).Ciao
As per your last edit how did you know there was something wrong with the del Rio addition and link (which I also said to author should be deleted, or something along those lines)? How did you know that the info came from a blog?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 01:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
also made some key adjustments to MdA p. today. But I really have no more to add or say now. Thank heaven. You'r right. I'm an addict and I need to break it.-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 01:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello FH, I have 4 pp. on my watchlist: the GG and MdA pp, and the talk pp for each. My watchpage doesn't seem to indicate, however which p. the edit's have been made. What am I missing?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 21:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore, at some pt I inadvertently put your talk p. on my watch list and there was one item only from it on my p (from some other subject you're involved with). Then, when I removed your p., 3 changes to the gg p. were deleted (only 1 by you). I now have only 1 item on my watchlist, above, whereas there should be 3 or 4. Why? I ask myself. You may not be able to help me but I'm just so damn frustrated. I wish there was someone could call, you know, like customer service, to explain these irregularities to me. but if you have a minute and can figure out what the hell my problem is, I'd be very grateful. See ya teach,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 16:50, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Your welcome! I'm glad you're following these little edits because I don't ustand them. Now, accd to revision 3/30, Masque (is that his name?) added a book to the bib by Carr. but it doesn't show up in the bib. On the other hand, another Bainbridge edition was added that is not indicated in the edit history. what's that about? I'm going to delete it because it's not referenced in the text.-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, what the hell is Mai Oui!'s change? I don't see any evidence of his addition in the text. -- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 21:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, you are just too amazing and way smarter than me with ths stuff. Thanks for answering and spending all that time but i have no idea what youre talking about in most of it. I do know about worldcat of course and that will be fun to look and also ustand now how isbn numbers can provide information. As for the rest, you might as well be talking in Swedish! :) I don't know what 4/1 edit by Serge means either but I just let tht stuff go.
So should we keep the Carr book in the Bib?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
By the way, have you even seen a garbo picture yet?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
I just got balled out by SergeWoodzing for writing on his user vs. talk p. Ouch! Now that I know the difference, what are user pp. for?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 15:23, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't think that I inserted a BLP violation; the statement was sourced. That being said, my cat and I are looking for better sources about Rick Perry, and until I find them, I won't add the information back in.
Bearian (
talk) 20:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding deadurl=no
to the citations for
Greg Smith's resignation letter. I didn't know about that option: it's a great improvement. Please accept this customized barnstar in recognition of your editing skills. All the best -
Pointillist (
talk) 18:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Now I need to know, is this coincidence or did you design that specific barnstar after reading the post immediately above?
The deadurl parameter is fairly new, added some time last June. I stumbled across it accidentally a while ago while checking proper format for another parameter and really like being taken to the original article instead of the archived version when it's available. Fat&Happy ( talk) 19:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
F&H,
Thank you for fixing the mess I made of the David Ricardo article. I was just trying to correct the DoB in the box. I still don't know how I screwed it up :-). Thanks again, Michael David ( talk) 21:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
We're taking that question about the 1920 Election info box to the talk page, where it belongs. No sense getting in a stupid edit war. Feel free to chime in. —Tim //// Carrite ( talk) 05:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
F&H, someone has started messing with the page, adding information that is erroneous, disorganized, and badly written and deleting stuff I wrote that is accurate. I just wrote a long message to this person (I think it's a guy--the tone of his messages--so I'll refer to him) expressing my concern and then went back and returned my version, with 2 minor (in my opinion, superfluous) additions he made. He's the same person who suddenly changed the top picture with what I think is a terrible one. Spent a long time arguing my case and the original is back up. What's your philosophy about this? I'm very attached to the article, obviously, having devoted ALL my free time to it since July, and think it's excellent. I'm concerned that someone can come and just butcher excellent work. Please do me a huge favor and read my comments to him on his talk p. And then tell me your thoughts on this whole subject. Thanks so much,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 23:14, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again for sticking with these boring questions. Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 23:01, 29 March 2012 (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 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 13 |
Unproductive discussions with user attempting to justify ignoring WP:MOSBIO |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Moving towards a third opinionI started a discussion on the Fermi-Dirac statistics. If you don't participate, I will follow the third opinion procedure: consider applying to the WP:AN/I noticeboard (see WP:3RR for further guidance). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 07:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC) The Creation of Wave Mechanics; Early Response and Applications 1925-1926, page 767, Springer. Read it now! Fermi was the first... Now I should really follow all the changes you make, and ask for the sources, and not only the sources, I want the title of the book and the page!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 15:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC) Joe SatrianiHe is mentioned in many other pages as Italian - American. So either you adapt all others wiki pages, or you change back this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 08:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
My daughter was made in Germany, born in Taipei, and she is Italian!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 01:51, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Frank SinatraBoth parents were Italian, what do you need more to be Italian??? He grew up in an Italian family, with Italian education style at home (which is the most important thing)....I really don't understand.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 09:02, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
He was born in USA, not in America. America is a continent going from Canada to Chile... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 01:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course, you didn't write USA, you wrote American....that is why American is not correct. You should have written US people... and the name America derives by the way by Amerigo Vespucci...check where was born... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC) I would like to know the following: - who are you to decide what is correct and what it is wrong? - than try to convince someone from South America that American means someone coming from USA. - last but not the least, Wikipedia defines these people as Italian-American, either you change the definition of Italian-American, or you accept my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I have the same feeling about you. I based my knowledge not on common usage, but on logic... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Italian-AmericanSince it seems "you work" for Wikipedia, I hope you agree with what you write. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_American In my opinion you must be consistent, so either you change the definition in that page, or you change back what I wrote...Moreover, I don't understand who are you to delete my changes....The definition of Italian-American is quite clear, and it cannot be misunderstood... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 02:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
If you act consequently, you should go to change that page too...otherwise you are making something inconsistent... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Federico FagginWhere did you get the information that Faggin does not have the italian passport any longer? As far as I know, you can hold both passports, and since man was in Italy till ca 25 years, he is at least Italian.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 04:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Riccardo GiacconiAccording to what you wrote, this scientist is Italian too. Born in Italy, studied in Italy, he holds an Italian passport. This contradicts what you previously wrote... Please change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC) In the reference reported (n.1) there no sign of US citizenship acquired, and he has definitely the Italian one. Since you can hold both, what I wrote it is correct. So let me know who is now the ignorant, the one who writes about fact, or the one who doesn't want to listen too. If you don't answer, I will escalate this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Fermi-DiracIf Fat&Happy besides deleting everything I write, had spent some time to read the whole article, it would not appear so ignorant. In fact what I added, it is written few lines after....Just take some time, read, and you can learn something. I am going to find the original papers for you, afterwards I hope that in front of the evidence you will stop bothering me.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 02:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC) So I found. The number 3 in italian publication indicates the month (i.e. March). Since Dirac published in October of the same year, I hope you can agree that October follows March. Correct? ;-). Moreover, Fermi first published it in Italian, BUT some English scientist, more and less when Dirac was going to publish his work, were already aware of Fermi work. Search for "Thomas-Fermi"....I hope you finally stop bothering me, assuming you are the only intelligent one.. Moreover, you didn't wonder why the particles of this statistics are called Fermi's particles, the energy level, Fermi's levels, and so on and so forth....Why didn't they call Dirac's particles, or Dirac's energy? Why? Fermi published the work (still before Dirac) also in German... Fermi, E. (1926). Zur Quantelung des idealen einatomigen Gases Zeitschrift für Physik, 36 (11-12), 902-912 DOI: 10.1007/BF01400221 I am annoyed by you behaviourTherefore I will escalate this issue. Someone has to stop your dictatorial behaviour. What you wrote is a point-of-view as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonio.napoli ( talk • contribs) 05:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC) |
See here. Just so no one violates the 3RR over this. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Given the general public heard the term 501 and colbert unfortunately keeps calling his PAC a 501...I have elected a compromise
This route involves forming one firm, that is usually a 501 (c) non-profit, or 527 organization so the donation can be tax deductible, and then the PAC to receive them. The scheme, commonly known as a "money loop" or "money trail", was detailed in the New York Times, and attracted the attention of the IRS in 2010, and the IRS subsequently advised big donors their tax deductions were questionable.[46]
I have on my to do list to rewrite the 527 page since it really isn't easy to understand why they are different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbmaise ( talk • contribs) 23:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
why do u insist on correcting everything that you feel is right. Let me tell you something you are not always right and you seem to spend too much time editing wikipedia perhaps you should find something more productive to do than edit the worlds must un reliable website that seems to be unreliable because of people like you messing it up and not listening to others who actually have more knowledge than you on the matter because their fans or are of that area a specialist. Tell me cos i am keen to know where you get your supposed knowledge from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.124.76.227 ( talk) 20:14, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Fat&Happy, over the weekend an editor named TimothyHorrigan made an edit that I believe is vandalism to the Political positions of Newt Gingrich article, in the "Same-sex marriage" section. This is not the first time that Horrigan has made a similar change, and the last time you reverted his edit. I wonder if you would mind taking a look at this most recent edit and undo it if you agree this is reasonable? Thanks, Joe DeSantis Communications Director, Gingrich 2012 ( talk) 00:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello.
Please stop introducing redirects into the article of Jayne Mansfield. The fact that they are not broken is not a reason for introducing them. Introducing redirects will lead to worse performance – as an extra access is required for the linked page – as well as decreased navigability.
If you do it again, I will have to report you to 3rr or WP:AN/I.
Cheers
HandsomeFella ( talk) 09:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
… adding Rick Santorum's age, without so much as even a comment to explain why. Why? — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 23:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I hadn't thought to look at the Ron Paul page edit log. Thank you — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 14:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
If you have the time, would you mind offering an opinion regarding reliable sources and the attribution of opinions and statements provided by Warren Commission critics? Thanks! Location ( talk) 01:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
The Graphic Designer's Barnstar | |
I love the Black Eyed Peas band!! they are so awesome!!!! Sweet&snazzy101 ( talk) 00:50, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi F&H. Can you please elaborate on the talk page on why you removed the same content three times in like three hours. I think the 1RR rule regarding Arab-Israel topics should apply here, but even if not, your treading far too closely to violating our general edit-warring rules. It would probably be best if you self-reverted pending some sort of explanation on the talk page. Thanks, -- brew crewer (yada, yada) 18:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
All articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict broadly construed are under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). When in doubt, assume it is related.
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Reverts of edits made by anonymous IP editors that are not vandalism are exempt from 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring.
Editors who otherwise violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
After being warned, any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process may be blocked up to one year, topic-banned, further revert-restricted, or otherwise restricted from editing.
Best Wishes
AnkhMorpork (
talk) 19:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Your thoughts please
Best Wishes
AnkhMorpork (
talk) 13:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi FH, before you disappear, I have one question about the content of the section "Screen Persona." You may recall that Lobo 5something-or-other thought that the repeated motif of the "I want to be alone" line in so many of her pictures was misplaced in the "Queen of MGM" section and put it a section she created called "Personal life." I rejected the idea, we discussed the matter for a while, and she came up with the idea of creating a new section, "Screen Persona," in which to put it, which I agreed to. But now, I've been considering whether or not it belongs in separate section with that title. Her persona, I think, is much more complex than just "I want to be alone." I'm not up for writing about her screen persona in a section, aspects of which are woven throughout the article. So I'm inclined to put this stuff back into "Queen of MGM." I'm interested in your thoughts on the matter. Thanks for your time, -- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 18:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
One more brief thing. Can you look at the most recent edit, made by ERJANIK, and tell me if you ustand who it is (why red?) and what the revision is exactly? Gracias,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 19:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Hey man, well I guess that's about it for a while. I've pretty much exhausted my knowledge and writing skills. Though it's really strange how, out of the blue, I'll think of a word, or a phrase, or something to adjust or add. Just Randomly comes to me. So I'll probably continue tweaking. I'm assuming you approve of the repositioning and rewording of the personae stuff. I know you'll be happy I added citations for G's depression and moodiness. You've been a superlative editor as I'm sure you are with all the writers you work with. I'll miss having you around because you've become a friend of sorts. We've been working on this thing since the end of July. Unless you find other stuff that needs to be adjusted. My name, btw, is Annie. Take care,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I've not responded earlier. I've had some real-life things to take care of, and sloughed off WP somewhat for a while.
Hah! I see you just couldn't give up cold turkey; one of the early-warning signs of addiction. How extensively are you planning on re-doing the de Acosta article?
Talk page archiving: The simple manual way is to create a new page named User talk:Classicfilmbuff/Archive 1, then just edit both pages, cut/pasting from one to the other. Your page doesn't seem active enough to warrant setting it up to be done automatically by a robot script. Or you could just delete old stuff (especially the notice from the disambiguation bot); after all, it can always be retrieved by accessing old versions from the history page. Fat&Happy ( talk) 03:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Hey man, who the hell is pixiebot (see history p.) His name (talk p.) is Rich. I queried him about how he finds these minUTE things, like where hyphens should go in isbn numbers, and corrects them! I wrote him on his page asking a series of questions. But I'm interested in your thoughts. Is he "watching" this page? Fascinating!-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 21:52, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
Citation needed|date=March 2012}}
. The program's author (Rich, I guess) apparently changed it recently to also scan articles and properly hyphenate ISBN numbers. (Irritating little thing; I thought I had gone through and done that correctly on Garbo a while ago, but it found two that I missed which had been previously formatted incorrectly and fixed them...) It's been making those changes to a lot of articles for, maybe, a couple of weeks now. (I do wish though, that it would convert old ISBN 10-digit numbers to the current 13-digit versions while it's at it; It's pretty much a matter of prepending "978-" and mathematically recalculating the last digit as a
check digit.)
Fat&Happy (
talk) 22:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)ALSO. I see the p. now has 130 watchers. Who are these peopl and why are they watching the page? 2nd, weird thing. I checked into the ratings and they've all been deleted (there were about 25 when I last checked) except the writing which is rated 5.0 (doesn't ring true) with something like 35 raters. Weird breakdown of system? Flummoxed, as usual,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC).Ciao
As per your last edit how did you know there was something wrong with the del Rio addition and link (which I also said to author should be deleted, or something along those lines)? How did you know that the info came from a blog?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 01:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
also made some key adjustments to MdA p. today. But I really have no more to add or say now. Thank heaven. You'r right. I'm an addict and I need to break it.-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 01:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello FH, I have 4 pp. on my watchlist: the GG and MdA pp, and the talk pp for each. My watchpage doesn't seem to indicate, however which p. the edit's have been made. What am I missing?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 21:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore, at some pt I inadvertently put your talk p. on my watch list and there was one item only from it on my p (from some other subject you're involved with). Then, when I removed your p., 3 changes to the gg p. were deleted (only 1 by you). I now have only 1 item on my watchlist, above, whereas there should be 3 or 4. Why? I ask myself. You may not be able to help me but I'm just so damn frustrated. I wish there was someone could call, you know, like customer service, to explain these irregularities to me. but if you have a minute and can figure out what the hell my problem is, I'd be very grateful. See ya teach,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 16:50, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Your welcome! I'm glad you're following these little edits because I don't ustand them. Now, accd to revision 3/30, Masque (is that his name?) added a book to the bib by Carr. but it doesn't show up in the bib. On the other hand, another Bainbridge edition was added that is not indicated in the edit history. what's that about? I'm going to delete it because it's not referenced in the text.-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, what the hell is Mai Oui!'s change? I don't see any evidence of his addition in the text. -- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 21:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, you are just too amazing and way smarter than me with ths stuff. Thanks for answering and spending all that time but i have no idea what youre talking about in most of it. I do know about worldcat of course and that will be fun to look and also ustand now how isbn numbers can provide information. As for the rest, you might as well be talking in Swedish! :) I don't know what 4/1 edit by Serge means either but I just let tht stuff go.
So should we keep the Carr book in the Bib?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
By the way, have you even seen a garbo picture yet?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 22:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
I just got balled out by SergeWoodzing for writing on his user vs. talk p. Ouch! Now that I know the difference, what are user pp. for?-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 15:23, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't think that I inserted a BLP violation; the statement was sourced. That being said, my cat and I are looking for better sources about Rick Perry, and until I find them, I won't add the information back in.
Bearian (
talk) 20:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding deadurl=no
to the citations for
Greg Smith's resignation letter. I didn't know about that option: it's a great improvement. Please accept this customized barnstar in recognition of your editing skills. All the best -
Pointillist (
talk) 18:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Now I need to know, is this coincidence or did you design that specific barnstar after reading the post immediately above?
The deadurl parameter is fairly new, added some time last June. I stumbled across it accidentally a while ago while checking proper format for another parameter and really like being taken to the original article instead of the archived version when it's available. Fat&Happy ( talk) 19:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
F&H,
Thank you for fixing the mess I made of the David Ricardo article. I was just trying to correct the DoB in the box. I still don't know how I screwed it up :-). Thanks again, Michael David ( talk) 21:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
We're taking that question about the 1920 Election info box to the talk page, where it belongs. No sense getting in a stupid edit war. Feel free to chime in. —Tim //// Carrite ( talk) 05:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
F&H, someone has started messing with the page, adding information that is erroneous, disorganized, and badly written and deleting stuff I wrote that is accurate. I just wrote a long message to this person (I think it's a guy--the tone of his messages--so I'll refer to him) expressing my concern and then went back and returned my version, with 2 minor (in my opinion, superfluous) additions he made. He's the same person who suddenly changed the top picture with what I think is a terrible one. Spent a long time arguing my case and the original is back up. What's your philosophy about this? I'm very attached to the article, obviously, having devoted ALL my free time to it since July, and think it's excellent. I'm concerned that someone can come and just butcher excellent work. Please do me a huge favor and read my comments to him on his talk p. And then tell me your thoughts on this whole subject. Thanks so much,-- Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 23:14, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again for sticking with these boring questions. Classicfilmbuff ( talk) 23:01, 29 March 2012 (UTC) |