![]() | 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. |
Why did you removed the sentence for U.S. Route 28? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.126.18 ( talk) 23:19, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Stop deleting my work! The first time you did it was valid: I didn't include references. So okay, I fixed that. Now you've deleted my work again, but this time you've come up with a different reason: my edits aren't valid.
If that's the case, why didn't you say that the first time? And are you going to give a third reason when you delete it the next time?
If you do delete it again, I'll file a formal complaint, and we can let it be adjudicated.
Not sure why you think you're the sole arbiter of who gets to edit this article: Wikipedia is a community project. Chillowack ( talk) 03:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
You are probably right, but I always tend to WP:AGF. And, for reasons maybe obvious in this context, I prefer to abbreviate my name as StS. No harm, of course ;-). -- Stephan Schulz ( talk) 22:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MarnetteD. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
216.152.182.8 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Is taking quite the liberties with categories. Most are unsourced and many quite dubious. this one a Popeye as category:Films about Native Americans. Perhaps category:Films depicting Native Americans in a derogatory manner might be more appropriate. I've reverted a few. I see you have been busy with this anon as well... Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 04:41, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Cheers! DonQuixote ( talk) 18:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC) |
Hello,
I saw on the Despicable Me 2 article that you reverted an edit that I made regarding a tweet. I did not add the tweet myself (it was added in 2012), I just reformatted it to the tweet citing format. I'm not certain if that would invalidate the original retrieving date for it, so I reverted it back. I would like to have it back to the original presentation. Please advise. Thank you. 205.189.94.11 ( talk) 20:47, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi MarnetteD, I noticed this user's contributions consist almost exclusively of changes to awards and nominations of various actor articles. It's not who I think it is, right? Am I just being paranoid? Sro23 ( talk) 14:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Can you please explain what makes the use of TSPDT as a source "as POV as anything else"? AndrewOne ( talk) 01:09, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Michael, just wondering did you wonder the Illuminations DVD of Deborah Warner's Richard II from Amazon.co.uk? I just got an email from Amazon saying my delivery estimate (December 2) had changed; paraphrasing, but basically, they don't know what the new estimate is as they're out of stock and not sure when (or if) they'll be getting any new ones in. I ordered mine literally the day Illuminations announced it, so I emailed Illuminations, and they got back to me saying Amazon have yet to make an order for the DVD at all. They were actually planning on contacting them regarding why they hadn't heard from them. In any case the person I spoke to recommended I order from their website direct, as apart from the wait which we now face on Amazon, the DVD is actually £7 cheaper (which makes no sense at all to me, but I didn't ask!) If you're waiting on Amazon, you may want to cancel your order and go direct to the website ( [1]). I think they ship to the US (it's in the list of drop down countries anyway), but if they don't and you want to get it sooner rather than later, PM me your address, and I'll be happy to sort something out with you. With this, and the disc writing error on Wars of the Roses, I'm thinking Illuminations may want to be employing more reliable people!!!! Bertaut ( talk) 00:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
20:04, 4 December 2016 MarnetteD . . (no they shouldn't - only shows currently airing belong here - if and when shows return then we list them)
Then what do you think about these: /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_HBO /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Showtime /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_FX /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_AMC
Do you think all of these pages are wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.49.88.55 ( talk) 20:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Here's a bit of online audio-visual goodness, compiled by the person who recently wrote the tome The National Theatre Story. I didn't know who to share this with, but I thought you or your talk-page watchers might be interested: [2]. Cheers, Softlavender ( talk) 19:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hey Marnette: as you may have seen the IP editor had some complaints about you. I do not think they are valid, which is why I blocked them, but the editor seems reasonable enough and I trust they won't bother you again. I did promise them I would tell you that they took issue with your comments--do with this information what you like. Take care, Drmies ( talk) 04:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Just to let you know an anon has made a (bad faith) report about you at ANI which I replied to. You may want to take a look at it (assuming an admin hasn't closed it before you see it). Feinoha Talk 18:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
No, I did not know that Napoleon was out on DVD, perhaps in part because I am so much more now involved with the Bay Area theatre scene, and don't go to movies as much as I used to.
But I DID get to see the Stanley Kubrick exhibit in San Francisco during its 3-month run at the Jewish museum!! (And see 2001 in a big theatre this past April.) I have a photo of myself leaning over the miniature hedge maze from The Shining posed like Nicholson, and also got good photos of the Star Child, Moonwatcher's [almost typed Moonraker there] costume, masks from Eyes Wide Shut, female mannequins from Clockwork Orange, Kubrick's directors chair and chess set, letters of protest he got from various morals organizations re Lolita, as well as copious directors note. They even had a wall of books with all the stuff he bought (and read??) preparing for Napoleon.
I should send a few of these down your way.
I remain busy working as a tutor, teaching in an afterschool program in Alameda (currently on counter-intuitive probabilities), and being on the staff and curriculum committee of a summer camp.
Re a years old edit-war I had with User:Shirtwaist way back (he's no longer active) I can now verify that the Aeroflot logo is clearly visible on the tote-bags of the Russian scientists on the space station in 2001 (re last April's viewing of the film).-- WickerGuy ( talk) 19:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Could I request that the Poland semi-protection template is reinstated, This article (as most European country articles) was in semi-protected status, yet for some reason an admin just took it down, then after a spat of petty vandalize it was re-instated for two week, now again the article is open to all edits. Not sure where the debate took place to remove the protection status, I know it was temporarily strengthened for a week, but then it should be been returned to its original status, not removed completely. -- E-960 ( talk) 16:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Easter Egg |
A gift for your valiant efforts in combating the serial egger. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ Talk 17:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC) |
If or when you have a moment, can you take a look at the recent changes to this article. I have neither the time nor inclination to get into an edit war, but the recent additions are questionable, at best. Many thanks. --- The Old Jacobite The '45 00:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
123.103.148.92 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Appears to have a script running. I've set my prefs to show seconds on edit times. 123.103.148.92 restores vandalism in a 2-4 seconds. Can't wait until someone does IP hopping and script vandalism at the same time. Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 05:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
M, I have just watched this year's one-hour-long Doctor Who Christmas Special and was thoroughly entertained from start to finish. Wondering when you get to see it on
BBC America.
We were also given an early taster of the new series starting "in the spring". —
Gareth Griffith-Jones |
The Welsh |
Buzzard |
19:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) Your mast plan and mine are the same. Thanks for the update, Gareth! MD sent me a text and suggested I give it a read. I'm looking forward to seeing it; we don't get it until 9:00 pm, so I really have a wait. I'm hoping I can find GBBO's first Christmas special on YouTube and watch it before someone at the Beeb discovers it's there. You boys have fun! -- Drmargi ( talk) 20:19, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, just as a follow up to your post at ANI, while in this case the report was bollocks, editors should not provide links to outing material on-wiki unless they want to risk getting in trouble themselves. If you come across evidence of outing it should be sent to Arbcom or the Functionaries for investigation and action. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 00:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC).
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
...for my response to that Trump & US Jews query on the Humanities RD, were as swift as they were unexpected. Sincerely appreciated by yours truly, and wishing you all the best for 2017 -- Deborahjay ( talk) 20:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
I thought I would point you to the new source check category, Category:Pages with active help requests for the IABot Interface, which has replaced the excessively large and impossible to maintain old category.
Users that have difficulty using the new interface the template points to can activate a help request that will place the page in a category. Should be much easier to maintain, and allows for a much more productive user involvement in improving IABot's reliability.— cyberpower Chat:Online 13:29, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up
Cyberpower678
MarnetteD|
Talk
16:42, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Marnette, My name is Matt. I'm new to the Wikipedia editing community. I didn't realize we weren't supposed to add links to Section Headers. Thanks for letting me know.
There are some major lacks of neutrality on the page I was editing ( Nate Mendel, bassist for Foo Fighters.) I'm trying to go about remedying this. I made some really good revisions today, and found that they were reverted without any explanation by "GeneralizationsAreBad."
I see that you undid all the revisions I made, not just the header link. Can you advise me on how to proceed?
Many thanks Matt
Hi, I'm unclear why my entire edit has been wiped consistently. If a source is needed, I've sent several reliable ones. Also, I believe I have improved the original edit with additional information about the BBC television production based on Hanif Kureishi's novel. I know what I've added to the section is valid and an improvement, so what source is required? I've sent various links.
Also, after this continual reversion of editing began, I signed up and created an account, so I will use that as an ID consistently from now on.
Thanks,
-- Sreedb ( talk) 23:24, 2 January 2017 (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. |
Why did you removed the sentence for U.S. Route 28? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.126.18 ( talk) 23:19, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Stop deleting my work! The first time you did it was valid: I didn't include references. So okay, I fixed that. Now you've deleted my work again, but this time you've come up with a different reason: my edits aren't valid.
If that's the case, why didn't you say that the first time? And are you going to give a third reason when you delete it the next time?
If you do delete it again, I'll file a formal complaint, and we can let it be adjudicated.
Not sure why you think you're the sole arbiter of who gets to edit this article: Wikipedia is a community project. Chillowack ( talk) 03:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
You are probably right, but I always tend to WP:AGF. And, for reasons maybe obvious in this context, I prefer to abbreviate my name as StS. No harm, of course ;-). -- Stephan Schulz ( talk) 22:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MarnetteD. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
216.152.182.8 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Is taking quite the liberties with categories. Most are unsourced and many quite dubious. this one a Popeye as category:Films about Native Americans. Perhaps category:Films depicting Native Americans in a derogatory manner might be more appropriate. I've reverted a few. I see you have been busy with this anon as well... Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 04:41, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Cheers! DonQuixote ( talk) 18:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC) |
Hello,
I saw on the Despicable Me 2 article that you reverted an edit that I made regarding a tweet. I did not add the tweet myself (it was added in 2012), I just reformatted it to the tweet citing format. I'm not certain if that would invalidate the original retrieving date for it, so I reverted it back. I would like to have it back to the original presentation. Please advise. Thank you. 205.189.94.11 ( talk) 20:47, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi MarnetteD, I noticed this user's contributions consist almost exclusively of changes to awards and nominations of various actor articles. It's not who I think it is, right? Am I just being paranoid? Sro23 ( talk) 14:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Can you please explain what makes the use of TSPDT as a source "as POV as anything else"? AndrewOne ( talk) 01:09, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Michael, just wondering did you wonder the Illuminations DVD of Deborah Warner's Richard II from Amazon.co.uk? I just got an email from Amazon saying my delivery estimate (December 2) had changed; paraphrasing, but basically, they don't know what the new estimate is as they're out of stock and not sure when (or if) they'll be getting any new ones in. I ordered mine literally the day Illuminations announced it, so I emailed Illuminations, and they got back to me saying Amazon have yet to make an order for the DVD at all. They were actually planning on contacting them regarding why they hadn't heard from them. In any case the person I spoke to recommended I order from their website direct, as apart from the wait which we now face on Amazon, the DVD is actually £7 cheaper (which makes no sense at all to me, but I didn't ask!) If you're waiting on Amazon, you may want to cancel your order and go direct to the website ( [1]). I think they ship to the US (it's in the list of drop down countries anyway), but if they don't and you want to get it sooner rather than later, PM me your address, and I'll be happy to sort something out with you. With this, and the disc writing error on Wars of the Roses, I'm thinking Illuminations may want to be employing more reliable people!!!! Bertaut ( talk) 00:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
20:04, 4 December 2016 MarnetteD . . (no they shouldn't - only shows currently airing belong here - if and when shows return then we list them)
Then what do you think about these: /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_HBO /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Showtime /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_FX /info/en/?search=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_AMC
Do you think all of these pages are wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.49.88.55 ( talk) 20:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Here's a bit of online audio-visual goodness, compiled by the person who recently wrote the tome The National Theatre Story. I didn't know who to share this with, but I thought you or your talk-page watchers might be interested: [2]. Cheers, Softlavender ( talk) 19:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hey Marnette: as you may have seen the IP editor had some complaints about you. I do not think they are valid, which is why I blocked them, but the editor seems reasonable enough and I trust they won't bother you again. I did promise them I would tell you that they took issue with your comments--do with this information what you like. Take care, Drmies ( talk) 04:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Just to let you know an anon has made a (bad faith) report about you at ANI which I replied to. You may want to take a look at it (assuming an admin hasn't closed it before you see it). Feinoha Talk 18:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
No, I did not know that Napoleon was out on DVD, perhaps in part because I am so much more now involved with the Bay Area theatre scene, and don't go to movies as much as I used to.
But I DID get to see the Stanley Kubrick exhibit in San Francisco during its 3-month run at the Jewish museum!! (And see 2001 in a big theatre this past April.) I have a photo of myself leaning over the miniature hedge maze from The Shining posed like Nicholson, and also got good photos of the Star Child, Moonwatcher's [almost typed Moonraker there] costume, masks from Eyes Wide Shut, female mannequins from Clockwork Orange, Kubrick's directors chair and chess set, letters of protest he got from various morals organizations re Lolita, as well as copious directors note. They even had a wall of books with all the stuff he bought (and read??) preparing for Napoleon.
I should send a few of these down your way.
I remain busy working as a tutor, teaching in an afterschool program in Alameda (currently on counter-intuitive probabilities), and being on the staff and curriculum committee of a summer camp.
Re a years old edit-war I had with User:Shirtwaist way back (he's no longer active) I can now verify that the Aeroflot logo is clearly visible on the tote-bags of the Russian scientists on the space station in 2001 (re last April's viewing of the film).-- WickerGuy ( talk) 19:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Could I request that the Poland semi-protection template is reinstated, This article (as most European country articles) was in semi-protected status, yet for some reason an admin just took it down, then after a spat of petty vandalize it was re-instated for two week, now again the article is open to all edits. Not sure where the debate took place to remove the protection status, I know it was temporarily strengthened for a week, but then it should be been returned to its original status, not removed completely. -- E-960 ( talk) 16:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Easter Egg |
A gift for your valiant efforts in combating the serial egger. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ Talk 17:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC) |
If or when you have a moment, can you take a look at the recent changes to this article. I have neither the time nor inclination to get into an edit war, but the recent additions are questionable, at best. Many thanks. --- The Old Jacobite The '45 00:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
123.103.148.92 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Appears to have a script running. I've set my prefs to show seconds on edit times. 123.103.148.92 restores vandalism in a 2-4 seconds. Can't wait until someone does IP hopping and script vandalism at the same time. Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 05:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
M, I have just watched this year's one-hour-long Doctor Who Christmas Special and was thoroughly entertained from start to finish. Wondering when you get to see it on
BBC America.
We were also given an early taster of the new series starting "in the spring". —
Gareth Griffith-Jones |
The Welsh |
Buzzard |
19:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) Your mast plan and mine are the same. Thanks for the update, Gareth! MD sent me a text and suggested I give it a read. I'm looking forward to seeing it; we don't get it until 9:00 pm, so I really have a wait. I'm hoping I can find GBBO's first Christmas special on YouTube and watch it before someone at the Beeb discovers it's there. You boys have fun! -- Drmargi ( talk) 20:19, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, just as a follow up to your post at ANI, while in this case the report was bollocks, editors should not provide links to outing material on-wiki unless they want to risk getting in trouble themselves. If you come across evidence of outing it should be sent to Arbcom or the Functionaries for investigation and action. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 00:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC).
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
...for my response to that Trump & US Jews query on the Humanities RD, were as swift as they were unexpected. Sincerely appreciated by yours truly, and wishing you all the best for 2017 -- Deborahjay ( talk) 20:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
I thought I would point you to the new source check category, Category:Pages with active help requests for the IABot Interface, which has replaced the excessively large and impossible to maintain old category.
Users that have difficulty using the new interface the template points to can activate a help request that will place the page in a category. Should be much easier to maintain, and allows for a much more productive user involvement in improving IABot's reliability.— cyberpower Chat:Online 13:29, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up
Cyberpower678
MarnetteD|
Talk
16:42, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Marnette, My name is Matt. I'm new to the Wikipedia editing community. I didn't realize we weren't supposed to add links to Section Headers. Thanks for letting me know.
There are some major lacks of neutrality on the page I was editing ( Nate Mendel, bassist for Foo Fighters.) I'm trying to go about remedying this. I made some really good revisions today, and found that they were reverted without any explanation by "GeneralizationsAreBad."
I see that you undid all the revisions I made, not just the header link. Can you advise me on how to proceed?
Many thanks Matt
Hi, I'm unclear why my entire edit has been wiped consistently. If a source is needed, I've sent several reliable ones. Also, I believe I have improved the original edit with additional information about the BBC television production based on Hanif Kureishi's novel. I know what I've added to the section is valid and an improvement, so what source is required? I've sent various links.
Also, after this continual reversion of editing began, I signed up and created an account, so I will use that as an ID consistently from now on.
Thanks,
-- Sreedb ( talk) 23:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)