Hi Rivertorch, thanks for cleaning up behind me. I don't regularly edit here in en:WP, so I'm a little unaccustomed. The "edit semiprotected" template doesn't exist in de:WP, that's probably why I overlooked it. Regards, •
•
hugarheimur
14:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
File:Happy New Year 2013.jpg | Have an enjoyable New Year! | |
Hello Rivertorch: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
New Year! Cheers,
Northamerica1000
(talk)
15:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
|
I noticed that you undid my revision because it's too much information, but I believe adding the election Harper became PM is more important then the next paragraph (which is still there) about the Conservatives winning their second minority in 2008.
Kndimov ( talk) 03:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Rivertorch! I ended up being the one to act on your request for revdel at ANI. In this case, posting the request to ANI was fine, as the comment was already being discussed there. But in general, I think it's preferred to ask an admin discreetly about it, to avoid drawing attention to the comment. There's an IRC channel dedicated to revdel requests (wikipedia-en-revdel, I think) if you use IRC, there's email, and there's always an admin's talk page. Anyway, thanks for bringing it up, no matter how you did it! Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 15:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Once burned, twice shy, and I don't do IRC. (Should I?) I do appreciate your willingness to use your tools in this case, and I'm grateful for your taking the time to leave me a note here. Rivertorch ( talk) 19:45, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Mormonism is NOT a form of Christianity. Also, look at the pages I commented on. They need some work while people are fooling with Gangnam style. Sad, isn't it? Those pages could've been done years ago, but wikipedians are STILL arguing about the sex postions page. The depravity is pathetic on here. Please leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.19.129.167 ( talk) 08:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know how much news your read Rivertorch but I found this amusing and thought i'd share it.
...I can't believe they've changed the recruitment rules for being gay without telling us...I really don't want that tattooed =P
Enjoy
ツ Jenova
20 (
email)
20:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, you were right about that. There has been a pretty steady stream of vandalism, I have put it back under indef semi. Beeblebrox ( talk) 17:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rivertorch - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 16:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I cited a source and Cruise and Kilmer hate each factually. I am not edit warring. If that can be in Val Kilmer's page, why not Tom Cruise? Any reason you or anyone else got? I played by the rules. You all are making it edit warring. STCooper1( STCooper1 ( talk) 08:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC))
In any event, this discussion really should take place at Talk:Tom Cruise rather than my talk page. As I said in my note to you, I suggest you open a discussion there. Rivertorch ( talk) 10:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I have nothing more to say on the subject. Check Val Kilmer's page. Its on his written out in a way more like what your saying with the same source. Good bye. STCooper( STCooper1 ( talk) 18:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC))
I said that because its no big deal. I only wanted it explained why it was being removed after I referenced a source as I was asked to. The reverter before you didn't explain why he reverted. STCooper1( STCooper1 ( talk) 01:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC))
Fixed it. Good work. Dougweller ( talk) 05:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Internet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consolidation ( 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) 11:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Rivertorch,
The links to Gagosian Gallery are not intended as promotional, but are there to help any wikipedia user looking for additional biographical and exhibition history of the artists. It provides users with an additional resource for the artists (all subjects of the wikipedia pages that have been modified). All the pages that have been changed are in fact those of artists that are represented by Gagosian Gallery as is evident here: [1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GogoW24 ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Returned barnstar | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||
|
Hi, I was wondering if you'd check out a page I'm working on, and let me know how it's shaping? It would mean a lot! lol -- Matt723star ( talk) 16:21, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Please do look at User:Timtrent/Articles on suicides feel free to enhance it, and then, if you feel it is ready, move it to WIkipedia: space and place it in relevant categories. I fear I am standing too close to it to enhance it, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 20:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to take a look at it again tomorrow with fresh(er) eyes and brain, and then I'd like to ask another editor or two to look it over. Maybe you would too. It might be helpful to use the talk page ( User talk:Timtrent/Articles on suicides) if the conversation goes beyond us two, although I'm fine with continuing it here. Rivertorch ( talk) 07:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rivertorch, i was wondering if you had any good advice or tips for User:Jenova20/Gay propaganda, which i just started? What do you think? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ( email) 15:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 17:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I hope this one is working ! Of it doesn't, just search on google the following words : les portraits expressionistes de thierry Alonso gravleur. Thank you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPTLJC ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbxa_ifJwUQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
In this video we can see Mr Trigg Ison himself who presents the work Of the artist, at 29 seconds he speak about the collaboration between the two men...
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/06/162136.php. This one is an article from a newspaper I don't know.
I think that we can describe him as a patron because he became friend with the painter because of his work... It may be more accurate to say " activities in the art field"
Thank you for your time ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPTLJC ( talk • contribs) 13:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
I was going to reply to your recent post at WP:VPT#Stylesheets etc., but remembered about a similar post at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 July 16#The New Search Bar which was ruined because of my interruption. So I am posting the reply here.
That discussion at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 July 16#The New Search Bar and its continuation at User talk:Vanischenu/Archive 3#Display problem might also help. Thank you··· Vanischenu 「m/ Talk」 11:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Please find a new reference to the data. 115 was in 1950, but now 3 new islands (artificial, but still, islands) were built. Check the official government links. 451 km2 was in 1950. today is 459. check official gomnt links.
Good faith? - please revert to my edit. I Will not change data again. [2] [3] [4] [5] P.S. check google earth if not believe me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HonorTheIsland ( talk • contribs) 14:27, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Rivertorch. While trying to add a new report at the bottom, you seem to have messed up the board. You may have edited an old version of the noticeboard by mistake. Please undo your last change, and then try to post your new report more carefully. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 05:51, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Rivertorch! On the Wikipedia talk page you recently hatted and habbed a post. Please be sure the {{
hab}} template goes up against the left margin after the post. Otherwise it will hat and hab all the ensuing posts. No biggee. –
PAINE ELLSWORTH
CLIMAX!
07:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
PS. I don't know your views on the subjects, but pro or con, let me invite you to
Talk:Wikipedia#Deitalicization degrading? for comment, and as well to the RfC at
MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#Restricted-use media list.
could you clarify what you mean by "Undid good-faith edit as undue weight. Inappropriate to use primary source in lead" please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.105.180 ( talk) 18:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on a photo in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 02:56, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Your patience in explaining the obvious is appreciated, but I have removed the edit request you closed since, in my opinion, it's nothing but trolling, and I can't remove it without also removing your friendly response (and gorgeous prose). With apologies, Drmies ( talk) 22:07, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Rushdie's family made a move from Bombay to the new Pakistan but did not like it; he did too; he has suppressed this fact; that is why "Pakistani origins" etc is appropriate. He went to Britain as a Pakistani not as an Indian.
The present spiel on his page seems extremely self-serving. My good faith edit attempted to make it more objective. Kindly revert to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 05:10, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Rushdie himself,conversation reported by an interlocutor about 1974. Rushdie has been trying to get back some family property in Bombay left by his family when all of them moved to Pakistan. They were disillusioned there and thence he went to Britain. Ask him. (Plus all his stuff about being Kashmiri etc is all his own speculation.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 08:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
-- the entry for Rushdie as a whole remains unverifiable in many respects except from his own claims and statements -- e.g. his claim to be of Kashmiri origin. That is why the good faith edit made its corrections. The interlocutor's statement about the Rushdie family moving to Pakistan is somewhere on the net. The corrections were made, you reversed them, you asked for a reason, the reason is given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 10:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
"Rushdie went to Rugby at the age of 14.( around 1961). But his family left for Pakistan in 1964..." says a commentator, at the Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/260169500702542/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 04:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, True I am less familiar with Wikipedia but why the aggression? Are you an owner or editor here? Good faith edits were made to the Rushdie entry to make it sound more objective and less like self-serving spiel. Do you have any evidence he is Kashmiri other than him saying so? No you don't. Nor does he. Academic Recorder ( talk) 11:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Objectivity is often hard to come by, but neutrality is almost always possible and should be a constant goal. ( Policy demands that.) Sometimes edits intended to correct "self-serving spiel" go too far in the other direction and cast aspersions on their subjects. Finding a workable balance is usually possible, but when one editor's comments are repeatedly accompanied by unsupported claims and "I didn't hear that" behavior the likelihood of success plummets. Please think twice before choosing to further lengthen this thread, okay? Rivertorch ( talk) 16:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello again, I am sorry but you seem to me to be not merely dogmatic about your interpretation of Wikipedia but also relatively unaware about the facts of Rushdie's life. He is a major and controversial author who makes no secret about how much he thinks he deserves the Nobel in Literature. His self-serving spiel was corrected,in substance and emphasis, in good faith by me. You have without adequate reason deleted these good faith corrections. That says more about Wikipedia's processes than about Rushdie or me. I do not think this is the wrong forum for this discussion as my edits were reversed by you and not someone else. Academic Recorder ( talk) 23:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello there. I just updated the Mango article. It was your change that guided me to place some of the images as I did, particularly the image of the tree. I'm looking for feedback from you. Between your significant addition of the description text and the formatting changes I made, IMO the article improved quite a bit. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chango369w ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I reverted the edit you made to Invasion of Poland#Aftermath. I believe you're questioning the citation. Follow the link for a pic of the page 62 Kursk blah blah blah (Lloyd Clark). http://postimg.org/image/6y4zrnlht/. If you still deem my light paraphrase as a misinterpretation of the text, then please feel free to share yours. EyeTruth ( talk) 18:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
According to the consensus here [6]. ...William 18:42, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not remove neutral academic sourced material as you did HERE. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Environment_and_sexual_orientation&diff=550886077&oldid=550882549
Wikipedia is not a soapbox for your political views. Your action was at the least irresponsible, and at worst dishonest. Cut it out, read the sources, and TAKE IT TO TALK. Ragazz ( talk) 23:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
As for reversions and discussions, you surely know there are all sorts of good-faith reasons for reverting another contributor's additions. In my experience, it's usually a good idea if the editor adding new content or changing stable content is the one to "take it to talk" ( the second sentence here is instructive on that point), but no biggie. Surely you're not suggesting I open a discussion every time I revert an edit? Rivertorch ( talk) 04:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
This is attractive. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 19:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
What a cute puppy! | |
This cute puppy has been given to you for your recent amazing performance. Don't forget to train it. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 19:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC) |
I proposed a merger of two articles. Join in discussion at Talk:Amber Hagerman. -- George Ho ( talk) 04:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
my talk was removed by 'Aleksa Lukic'. ask him. i forgot what i wrote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.18.228 ( talk) 22:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
i saw your post. now tell me one thing, how can I PROVIDE THE LINK to the book which is not present on net? doesn't mean it doesn't happened? why do you have to use your own brain, if you don't have? you should have atleast have talked to me before restoration!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.18.228 ( talk) 21:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Rivertorch, thanks for cleaning up behind me. I don't regularly edit here in en:WP, so I'm a little unaccustomed. The "edit semiprotected" template doesn't exist in de:WP, that's probably why I overlooked it. Regards, •
•
hugarheimur
14:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
File:Happy New Year 2013.jpg | Have an enjoyable New Year! | |
Hello Rivertorch: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
New Year! Cheers,
Northamerica1000
(talk)
15:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
|
I noticed that you undid my revision because it's too much information, but I believe adding the election Harper became PM is more important then the next paragraph (which is still there) about the Conservatives winning their second minority in 2008.
Kndimov ( talk) 03:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Rivertorch! I ended up being the one to act on your request for revdel at ANI. In this case, posting the request to ANI was fine, as the comment was already being discussed there. But in general, I think it's preferred to ask an admin discreetly about it, to avoid drawing attention to the comment. There's an IRC channel dedicated to revdel requests (wikipedia-en-revdel, I think) if you use IRC, there's email, and there's always an admin's talk page. Anyway, thanks for bringing it up, no matter how you did it! Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 15:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Once burned, twice shy, and I don't do IRC. (Should I?) I do appreciate your willingness to use your tools in this case, and I'm grateful for your taking the time to leave me a note here. Rivertorch ( talk) 19:45, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Mormonism is NOT a form of Christianity. Also, look at the pages I commented on. They need some work while people are fooling with Gangnam style. Sad, isn't it? Those pages could've been done years ago, but wikipedians are STILL arguing about the sex postions page. The depravity is pathetic on here. Please leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.19.129.167 ( talk) 08:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know how much news your read Rivertorch but I found this amusing and thought i'd share it.
...I can't believe they've changed the recruitment rules for being gay without telling us...I really don't want that tattooed =P
Enjoy
ツ Jenova
20 (
email)
20:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, you were right about that. There has been a pretty steady stream of vandalism, I have put it back under indef semi. Beeblebrox ( talk) 17:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rivertorch - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 16:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I cited a source and Cruise and Kilmer hate each factually. I am not edit warring. If that can be in Val Kilmer's page, why not Tom Cruise? Any reason you or anyone else got? I played by the rules. You all are making it edit warring. STCooper1( STCooper1 ( talk) 08:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC))
In any event, this discussion really should take place at Talk:Tom Cruise rather than my talk page. As I said in my note to you, I suggest you open a discussion there. Rivertorch ( talk) 10:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I have nothing more to say on the subject. Check Val Kilmer's page. Its on his written out in a way more like what your saying with the same source. Good bye. STCooper( STCooper1 ( talk) 18:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC))
I said that because its no big deal. I only wanted it explained why it was being removed after I referenced a source as I was asked to. The reverter before you didn't explain why he reverted. STCooper1( STCooper1 ( talk) 01:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC))
Fixed it. Good work. Dougweller ( talk) 05:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Internet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consolidation ( 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) 11:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Rivertorch,
The links to Gagosian Gallery are not intended as promotional, but are there to help any wikipedia user looking for additional biographical and exhibition history of the artists. It provides users with an additional resource for the artists (all subjects of the wikipedia pages that have been modified). All the pages that have been changed are in fact those of artists that are represented by Gagosian Gallery as is evident here: [1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GogoW24 ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Returned barnstar | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||
|
Hi, I was wondering if you'd check out a page I'm working on, and let me know how it's shaping? It would mean a lot! lol -- Matt723star ( talk) 16:21, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Please do look at User:Timtrent/Articles on suicides feel free to enhance it, and then, if you feel it is ready, move it to WIkipedia: space and place it in relevant categories. I fear I am standing too close to it to enhance it, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 20:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to take a look at it again tomorrow with fresh(er) eyes and brain, and then I'd like to ask another editor or two to look it over. Maybe you would too. It might be helpful to use the talk page ( User talk:Timtrent/Articles on suicides) if the conversation goes beyond us two, although I'm fine with continuing it here. Rivertorch ( talk) 07:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rivertorch, i was wondering if you had any good advice or tips for User:Jenova20/Gay propaganda, which i just started? What do you think? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ( email) 15:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 17:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I hope this one is working ! Of it doesn't, just search on google the following words : les portraits expressionistes de thierry Alonso gravleur. Thank you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPTLJC ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbxa_ifJwUQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
In this video we can see Mr Trigg Ison himself who presents the work Of the artist, at 29 seconds he speak about the collaboration between the two men...
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/06/162136.php. This one is an article from a newspaper I don't know.
I think that we can describe him as a patron because he became friend with the painter because of his work... It may be more accurate to say " activities in the art field"
Thank you for your time ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPTLJC ( talk • contribs) 13:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
I was going to reply to your recent post at WP:VPT#Stylesheets etc., but remembered about a similar post at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 July 16#The New Search Bar which was ruined because of my interruption. So I am posting the reply here.
That discussion at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 July 16#The New Search Bar and its continuation at User talk:Vanischenu/Archive 3#Display problem might also help. Thank you··· Vanischenu 「m/ Talk」 11:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Please find a new reference to the data. 115 was in 1950, but now 3 new islands (artificial, but still, islands) were built. Check the official government links. 451 km2 was in 1950. today is 459. check official gomnt links.
Good faith? - please revert to my edit. I Will not change data again. [2] [3] [4] [5] P.S. check google earth if not believe me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HonorTheIsland ( talk • contribs) 14:27, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Rivertorch. While trying to add a new report at the bottom, you seem to have messed up the board. You may have edited an old version of the noticeboard by mistake. Please undo your last change, and then try to post your new report more carefully. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 05:51, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Rivertorch! On the Wikipedia talk page you recently hatted and habbed a post. Please be sure the {{
hab}} template goes up against the left margin after the post. Otherwise it will hat and hab all the ensuing posts. No biggee. –
PAINE ELLSWORTH
CLIMAX!
07:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
PS. I don't know your views on the subjects, but pro or con, let me invite you to
Talk:Wikipedia#Deitalicization degrading? for comment, and as well to the RfC at
MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#Restricted-use media list.
could you clarify what you mean by "Undid good-faith edit as undue weight. Inappropriate to use primary source in lead" please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.105.180 ( talk) 18:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on a photo in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 02:56, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Your patience in explaining the obvious is appreciated, but I have removed the edit request you closed since, in my opinion, it's nothing but trolling, and I can't remove it without also removing your friendly response (and gorgeous prose). With apologies, Drmies ( talk) 22:07, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Rushdie's family made a move from Bombay to the new Pakistan but did not like it; he did too; he has suppressed this fact; that is why "Pakistani origins" etc is appropriate. He went to Britain as a Pakistani not as an Indian.
The present spiel on his page seems extremely self-serving. My good faith edit attempted to make it more objective. Kindly revert to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 05:10, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Rushdie himself,conversation reported by an interlocutor about 1974. Rushdie has been trying to get back some family property in Bombay left by his family when all of them moved to Pakistan. They were disillusioned there and thence he went to Britain. Ask him. (Plus all his stuff about being Kashmiri etc is all his own speculation.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 08:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
-- the entry for Rushdie as a whole remains unverifiable in many respects except from his own claims and statements -- e.g. his claim to be of Kashmiri origin. That is why the good faith edit made its corrections. The interlocutor's statement about the Rushdie family moving to Pakistan is somewhere on the net. The corrections were made, you reversed them, you asked for a reason, the reason is given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 10:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
"Rushdie went to Rugby at the age of 14.( around 1961). But his family left for Pakistan in 1964..." says a commentator, at the Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/260169500702542/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder ( talk • contribs) 04:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, True I am less familiar with Wikipedia but why the aggression? Are you an owner or editor here? Good faith edits were made to the Rushdie entry to make it sound more objective and less like self-serving spiel. Do you have any evidence he is Kashmiri other than him saying so? No you don't. Nor does he. Academic Recorder ( talk) 11:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Objectivity is often hard to come by, but neutrality is almost always possible and should be a constant goal. ( Policy demands that.) Sometimes edits intended to correct "self-serving spiel" go too far in the other direction and cast aspersions on their subjects. Finding a workable balance is usually possible, but when one editor's comments are repeatedly accompanied by unsupported claims and "I didn't hear that" behavior the likelihood of success plummets. Please think twice before choosing to further lengthen this thread, okay? Rivertorch ( talk) 16:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello again, I am sorry but you seem to me to be not merely dogmatic about your interpretation of Wikipedia but also relatively unaware about the facts of Rushdie's life. He is a major and controversial author who makes no secret about how much he thinks he deserves the Nobel in Literature. His self-serving spiel was corrected,in substance and emphasis, in good faith by me. You have without adequate reason deleted these good faith corrections. That says more about Wikipedia's processes than about Rushdie or me. I do not think this is the wrong forum for this discussion as my edits were reversed by you and not someone else. Academic Recorder ( talk) 23:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello there. I just updated the Mango article. It was your change that guided me to place some of the images as I did, particularly the image of the tree. I'm looking for feedback from you. Between your significant addition of the description text and the formatting changes I made, IMO the article improved quite a bit. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chango369w ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I reverted the edit you made to Invasion of Poland#Aftermath. I believe you're questioning the citation. Follow the link for a pic of the page 62 Kursk blah blah blah (Lloyd Clark). http://postimg.org/image/6y4zrnlht/. If you still deem my light paraphrase as a misinterpretation of the text, then please feel free to share yours. EyeTruth ( talk) 18:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
According to the consensus here [6]. ...William 18:42, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not remove neutral academic sourced material as you did HERE. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Environment_and_sexual_orientation&diff=550886077&oldid=550882549
Wikipedia is not a soapbox for your political views. Your action was at the least irresponsible, and at worst dishonest. Cut it out, read the sources, and TAKE IT TO TALK. Ragazz ( talk) 23:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
As for reversions and discussions, you surely know there are all sorts of good-faith reasons for reverting another contributor's additions. In my experience, it's usually a good idea if the editor adding new content or changing stable content is the one to "take it to talk" ( the second sentence here is instructive on that point), but no biggie. Surely you're not suggesting I open a discussion every time I revert an edit? Rivertorch ( talk) 04:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
This is attractive. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 19:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
What a cute puppy! | |
This cute puppy has been given to you for your recent amazing performance. Don't forget to train it. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 19:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC) |
I proposed a merger of two articles. Join in discussion at Talk:Amber Hagerman. -- George Ho ( talk) 04:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
my talk was removed by 'Aleksa Lukic'. ask him. i forgot what i wrote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.18.228 ( talk) 22:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
i saw your post. now tell me one thing, how can I PROVIDE THE LINK to the book which is not present on net? doesn't mean it doesn't happened? why do you have to use your own brain, if you don't have? you should have atleast have talked to me before restoration!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.18.228 ( talk) 21:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)