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 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Hi Roscelese, yesterday I noticed a user by the name of Eratov making a number of un-summarized edits to articles about members of the Soviet Union. Although some of his edits seem legitimate, his changes to Arnold Deutsch and his extensive edits to Lavrentiy Beria and Gulag may be geared toward erasing criticism of the SU. Due to the size and complexity of this (and the little fact I know very little about the subject matter) I don't feel adequate to assess it myself. Could you give me some advice? Theinactivist ( talk • contribs) 01:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Just brought Skyeking/VHEMT talk page up at WP:ANI. Your comments are welcome. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Roscelese, our recent discussion seemed to spiral into territory it better not would have, if you feel offended I do apologize for that. I harbor no ill intent towards you or any of the groups you affiliate yourself with. Just out of curiosity, may I ask why are you so interested in the topic? What I've understood of the Torah, you're "off the hook" in (if you know what I mean) when it comes the topic and your religion. Tikru8 ( talk) 10:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Carina Vance Mafla at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OBSIDIAN† SOUL 16:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
On 10 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Carina Vance Mafla, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Carina Vance Mafla's campaign to shut down "torture clinics" that try to turn lesbians straight began years before she was appointed Ecuador's Minister for Public Health? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carina Vance Mafla.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 17:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, would you take a look at the Museo Nacional de Arte? I stumbled upon it, and I see hardly any third party sources, so maybe we should start an AfD-procedure. Regards, Jeff5102 ( talk) 09:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
An RM based on opinions expressed in the AfD. Hope you can chime in, as you did in the AfD! CMD ( talk) 00:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Santorum vs santorum". Thank you. -- The Gnome ( talk) 08:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, since you recently participated in an RfC at Campaign for "santorum" neologism, I thought you might be interested in this proposal for renaming the article, or perhaps another of the rename proposals on the page. Best, Be——Critical 22:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
They're debating what article to run on March 8th as the Featured Article. That day is International Women's Day, so I think something that fits that theme should run.-- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 22:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at WP:AN regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Topic ban proposal for User:Youreallycan (ex Off2riorob)". Thank you. -- В и к и T 00:33, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Aloha. I'm not very familiar with the history of homophobia on Wikipedia. I was wondering if you could bring me up to speed at some point. Do you think that policies like Wikipedia:No personal attacks and guidelines like Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:Etiquette adequately cover this problem? Viriditas ( talk) 02:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
I just took a look at the article on homophobia and I think it needs some major work. Could you take a look when you have some time and maybe raise the issue with the LGBT project? Thanks. Viriditas ( talk) 22:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Whew, that was close. That article was close to being deleted. Nice catch! Btw, what prompted you to visit that particular article? – Lionel ( talk) 07:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a little of my input and experience...the first or second day I started editing on Wikipedia, Feb 7 or 8, I knew who NYyankees51 and Lionel were. They reverted my edits on LGBT pages, tagged my citations, tagged many LGBT pages, and it seemed as if they were watching everything I did.- Teammm Let's Talk! :) 04:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Although I originally voted to keep the article on romney neologism, I see your point about it possibly being a little premature. Another editor made a proposal that we should merge the romney neologism article into the Seamus (dog) article. I like this idea because the two topics are related, and it allows us to retain the core material without having to justify a whole article on it. Debbie W. 04:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Hey Roscelese. This is just a notification that a binding, structured community discussion has been opened by myself and Steven Zhang on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As you were named as a involved party in the Abortion case, you may already know that remedy 5.1 called for a "systematic discussion and voting on article names". This remedy is now being fulfilled with this discussion. If you would like to participate, the discussion is taking place at WP:RFC/AAT. All the best, Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 22:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Category:Planned Parenthood, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 23:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Pro-life feminism". Thank you. -- PeRshGo ( talk) 16:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
I have started an ANI report on user:Liamfoley for sockpuppetry. Feel free to comment and expand. Thanks. Dominus Vobisdu ( talk) 18:17, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Rosecelese. I write to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an incident involving 123o ( talk · contribs) and myself; in which I have referred to a previous ANI report between yourself and the same user. Wesley ☀ Mouse 02:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. I just wanted to say I'm sorry for you being dragged into a personal dispute (I guess were supposed to be a hostile witness against me). Anyway, wanted to let you know that I learned a thing or two since our last encounter, so now is a good opportunity to apologize for an amateur response I made in the past. It would be nice if you will help me figuring out how to update the list from our previous discussion with new and valid data. cheers :) -- 123o ( talk) 16:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at Talk:Straight_pride#Proposed_merge. Thanks. Viriditas ( talk) 04:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is now a featured article. Thanks for your help on the talk page dispute a while back, it all worked out well in the end. Mark Arsten ( talk) 06:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding OED def to the antifeminism article lede... I looked at a lot of dictionaries before adding that section, and then inserted a cite tag for the WP:NOR reasons you mention. It was kind of a preemptive "help me" tag that I am glad you were able to help with. Peace, MPS ( talk) 22:01, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Your at 3 reverts, and you can be blocked for that many. Much better to discuss on Talk rather than edit summaries. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous ( talk) 01:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Roscelese,
Recently after reviewing a DYK nomination, you told me to drop a line in WP:RSN, which I did, but seems it didn't go correctly as I didn't get an evaluation yet. Could you fix the error or initiate the discussion? Thanks. Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Sent you the article about pro-life feminism. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 16:51, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Ros! Back in January [4] Catholic Healthcare West changed its name to Dignity Health (and its management structure). Does the Category CHW just get "moved" to Category Dignity Health, or is it more complicated than that? Thanks. -- Kenatipo speak! 21:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Banu_Nadir I doubt your reason for keeping that tag is same as al-A's. al-A i assume wants more muslims sources like sealed nectar used, am assuming you dont-- Misconceptions2 ( talk) 02:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
"Does it not support your anti-Muslim agenda now?"....sigh. i have mainly used muslim sources in all my articles, the most anti muslim sources you can get. 11 of 16 refs in that article are muslim sources-- Misconceptions2 ( talk) 03:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Rush Limbaugh – Sandra Fluke controversy has had changes in the length of biographical description of Sandra Fluke. It is currently quite minimal. If you have an opinion on how much biographical material on Sandra Fluke should be in the article, you can offer it on the talk page. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 17:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Barry (Why don't we talk?) 07:17, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
If you do not agree with an aspect of an edit please do not do a wholesale undo. You may well be changing things that are uncontroversial and beneficial as what happened here Also, a controversial book in the United States that has not even banned does not have to be in Category:Censorship AND Category:Censorship in the United States. Please also note that I have created Category:Book censorship in the United States. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 04:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Please clarify your revert based on copyright issues re: revision 484380232 by Aduron78 having to do with RCC position on homosexuality. What was copyrighted here? Frankgyn ( talk) 21:02, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
How can you tell, and from where? Have you tried a search with large segments of the text to find an original online source? Perhaps this is a problem in multiple articles on wikipedia that needs to be addressed when discovered. Frankgyn ( talk) 02:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
In light of this [5], I thought you should know - since you obviously didn't read the exchange on the talk page - that I am only trying to find a simpler way to express the generalities. You're right: the source is 'silly'. I'm all for a better one, but we don't have it! The one expert (Sir William Jones) who writes of the Claddagh, as it happens, copied his text from an earlier source which was half wrong!— Djathink imacowboy 20:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Do not assume that the abortion articles were my own personal analysis before deleting all of them and do some research. You'll find that 3 million Quranist Muslims think the same way and if you need proof of this then go to any Quran alone website or sites such as Submission.org that are Islamic websites Also the section which said excerpts from 'Quran' and Hadith was wrong because it contained no excerpts from Quran and they were all from hadith. Do you even know the difference between the two sorts of books? I have changed it to just say 'Hadith' which is correct. The opinion of killing life from the Quranic perspective is completely forbidden, even abortion - unless it threatens the mother hosts life. I should be allowed to post Quranic excerpts on the page to highlight this.
EddyJawed ( talk) 18:39, 30 March 2012 (GMT)
Re [6], please review [7]. You're not playing the game right - you can't tell someone you are talking about them - you have to hint obliquely. Hipocrite ( talk) 20:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
For making the WP:BLP compliant edit at PLF. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 23:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Roscelese. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
I am not a Sockpuppet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nevermas ( talk • contribs) 02:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know that I plan on nominating the Shaima Alawadi article for deletion as non-notable. I will post here again when I actually figure out how to do it. I wanted to give you super-early notice so that you could provide more sources or evidence that this murder is independently notable. LedRush ( talk) 15:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I saw this morning that papers are speculating that this was an honor killing now. I think this is an extremely sensitive topic with huge and obvious BLP concerns. However, it seems odd to include the "hate crime" theory and not the "honor killing" theory. If the case turns out to be the latter, I doubt this story will have much legs and, consequently, would be deserving of an article. But as the article has survived the deletion process, I feel we have to address the issues in some manner. Anyway, I have only a passing knowledge of the events and thought that you might be better equipped to deal with this than I.
You didn't leave a link in the G12 Speedy Deletion template, although you did in the edit summary, your tag should read {{db-g12|http://www.saintaire.com/company}}, provided that is the URL it is a copyvio of. Cheers, -- kelapstick( bainuu) 23:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Worth keeping an eye on that en: → es: translation project. Strong smell of freeloading - see "Purpose". — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 10:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
So the secular summit is secular. Good to know. And maybe we can say the Pope is an atheist, because he doesn't worship the One True God?
If you want that section in there, take it to the talk page like you should have from the beginning. Since we can't seem to agree on what "the" means, it would be helpful to have other comments. You can also make a WP:RfC. — kwami ( talk) 03:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
adjectives, such as terrorist, criminal, monster, A-hole if you prefer Wp to have pages that are of lower quality. I prefer otherwise, but I'm not a warrior. Have it your way. Kokot.kokotisko ( talk) 16:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
dear roscelese,
i need your advice. there seems to be a tag-team consisting of User_talk:Plot_Spoiler and User:AnkhMorpork as they're backing up each others edits on controversial subjects [9], [10]. are there any arenas here on wiki were such behavior could be addressed?-- altetendekrabbe 21:27, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I encourage you to avoid leaving any commnent in my talk page, due in the past I have received some unacceptable rude comments from you, up to calling me an "idiot", some other users have complained about similar comments from you, and actually you have been blocked because of that sort of personal attacks, so perhaps you are too engaged with pro-abortion and too susceptible to fly off the handle so if any other user is really concerned about my doings let them do the job of warning me. -- ClaudioSantos ¿? 12:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Kenneth Uwadi is back. It was an article that you did a, AfD and was deleted. There are a couple of refs that talk about him, but after reading them, they seem dubious. I deleted other refs that were unreliable or didn't talk about him. I'm up in the air on what to do. Could do a speedy delete because of the previous AfD, but it looks like new sources might have been added. Could you take a look? You saw the last revision, so you would be a better judge than I. Bgwhite ( talk) 06:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
http://us.cnn.com/2012/04/26/us/indiana-in-vitro-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 I know there's a risk of recentism here; however, I'm not proposing to focus on just this one news article.
I think it is encyclopedic to discuss the church's stance towards human reproduction e.g. contraception and fertility treatments. I'd like to give it a treatment similar to the article on Catholic Church and abortion or Catholic Church and abortion in the United States. I notice that there is no article on Catholic Church and human reproduction. What do you think of that as a title for a new article? -- Pseudo-Richard ( talk) 02:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
I understand you have strong personal feelings on the matter, but Wikipedia entries should stay as neutral and impartial as possible, avoiding any strong, definitive statements and opinions. Anyways, I have started a section on the Talk page about it to discuss the matter further. Thanks. ChessPlayerLev ( talk) 05:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 04:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could give us your advice, as a senior editor, on the question of [11] notability in the case of Edward S. May. While the rules for biographies tells us the criteria, I believe long-term experience as a Wikipedia editor can help us make a judgment call. I'm not sure I have it right. I lean towards deletion but I hate to dampen the enthusiasm of the author of the article, another fairly new editor and grad student in anthropology. However, the integrity of Wikipedia comes first. I’d appreciate your advice. Jason from nyc ( talk) 12:20, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello Roscelese. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Unfolded Film to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 00:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Quick Note, War on Women has been renominated for Deletion-- 209.6.69.227 ( talk) 19:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. I would appreciate it if you could visit Talk:Muhammad. The article, Muhammad, has changed in a significant way since it originally passed WP:GA several years ago. It now states in the opening paragraph that Mohammad is the Founder of Islam and has relegated to a note at the end of the article that Muslims, themselves don't believe this. I have started a discussion on the talk page concerning this and would value your input. Thanks so much. Veritycheck ( talk) 21:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Could you give your opinion to edit by Eraserhead1? See [12] Ron 1987 ( talk) 01:18, 11 May 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 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Hi Roscelese, yesterday I noticed a user by the name of Eratov making a number of un-summarized edits to articles about members of the Soviet Union. Although some of his edits seem legitimate, his changes to Arnold Deutsch and his extensive edits to Lavrentiy Beria and Gulag may be geared toward erasing criticism of the SU. Due to the size and complexity of this (and the little fact I know very little about the subject matter) I don't feel adequate to assess it myself. Could you give me some advice? Theinactivist ( talk • contribs) 01:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Just brought Skyeking/VHEMT talk page up at WP:ANI. Your comments are welcome. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Roscelese, our recent discussion seemed to spiral into territory it better not would have, if you feel offended I do apologize for that. I harbor no ill intent towards you or any of the groups you affiliate yourself with. Just out of curiosity, may I ask why are you so interested in the topic? What I've understood of the Torah, you're "off the hook" in (if you know what I mean) when it comes the topic and your religion. Tikru8 ( talk) 10:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Carina Vance Mafla at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OBSIDIAN† SOUL 16:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
On 10 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Carina Vance Mafla, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Carina Vance Mafla's campaign to shut down "torture clinics" that try to turn lesbians straight began years before she was appointed Ecuador's Minister for Public Health? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carina Vance Mafla.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 17:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, would you take a look at the Museo Nacional de Arte? I stumbled upon it, and I see hardly any third party sources, so maybe we should start an AfD-procedure. Regards, Jeff5102 ( talk) 09:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
An RM based on opinions expressed in the AfD. Hope you can chime in, as you did in the AfD! CMD ( talk) 00:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Santorum vs santorum". Thank you. -- The Gnome ( talk) 08:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, since you recently participated in an RfC at Campaign for "santorum" neologism, I thought you might be interested in this proposal for renaming the article, or perhaps another of the rename proposals on the page. Best, Be——Critical 22:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
They're debating what article to run on March 8th as the Featured Article. That day is International Women's Day, so I think something that fits that theme should run.-- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 22:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at WP:AN regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Topic ban proposal for User:Youreallycan (ex Off2riorob)". Thank you. -- В и к и T 00:33, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Aloha. I'm not very familiar with the history of homophobia on Wikipedia. I was wondering if you could bring me up to speed at some point. Do you think that policies like Wikipedia:No personal attacks and guidelines like Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:Etiquette adequately cover this problem? Viriditas ( talk) 02:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
I just took a look at the article on homophobia and I think it needs some major work. Could you take a look when you have some time and maybe raise the issue with the LGBT project? Thanks. Viriditas ( talk) 22:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Whew, that was close. That article was close to being deleted. Nice catch! Btw, what prompted you to visit that particular article? – Lionel ( talk) 07:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a little of my input and experience...the first or second day I started editing on Wikipedia, Feb 7 or 8, I knew who NYyankees51 and Lionel were. They reverted my edits on LGBT pages, tagged my citations, tagged many LGBT pages, and it seemed as if they were watching everything I did.- Teammm Let's Talk! :) 04:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Although I originally voted to keep the article on romney neologism, I see your point about it possibly being a little premature. Another editor made a proposal that we should merge the romney neologism article into the Seamus (dog) article. I like this idea because the two topics are related, and it allows us to retain the core material without having to justify a whole article on it. Debbie W. 04:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Hey Roscelese. This is just a notification that a binding, structured community discussion has been opened by myself and Steven Zhang on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As you were named as a involved party in the Abortion case, you may already know that remedy 5.1 called for a "systematic discussion and voting on article names". This remedy is now being fulfilled with this discussion. If you would like to participate, the discussion is taking place at WP:RFC/AAT. All the best, Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 22:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Category:Planned Parenthood, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 23:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Pro-life feminism". Thank you. -- PeRshGo ( talk) 16:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
I have started an ANI report on user:Liamfoley for sockpuppetry. Feel free to comment and expand. Thanks. Dominus Vobisdu ( talk) 18:17, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Rosecelese. I write to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an incident involving 123o ( talk · contribs) and myself; in which I have referred to a previous ANI report between yourself and the same user. Wesley ☀ Mouse 02:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. I just wanted to say I'm sorry for you being dragged into a personal dispute (I guess were supposed to be a hostile witness against me). Anyway, wanted to let you know that I learned a thing or two since our last encounter, so now is a good opportunity to apologize for an amateur response I made in the past. It would be nice if you will help me figuring out how to update the list from our previous discussion with new and valid data. cheers :) -- 123o ( talk) 16:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at Talk:Straight_pride#Proposed_merge. Thanks. Viriditas ( talk) 04:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is now a featured article. Thanks for your help on the talk page dispute a while back, it all worked out well in the end. Mark Arsten ( talk) 06:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding OED def to the antifeminism article lede... I looked at a lot of dictionaries before adding that section, and then inserted a cite tag for the WP:NOR reasons you mention. It was kind of a preemptive "help me" tag that I am glad you were able to help with. Peace, MPS ( talk) 22:01, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Your at 3 reverts, and you can be blocked for that many. Much better to discuss on Talk rather than edit summaries. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous ( talk) 01:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Roscelese,
Recently after reviewing a DYK nomination, you told me to drop a line in WP:RSN, which I did, but seems it didn't go correctly as I didn't get an evaluation yet. Could you fix the error or initiate the discussion? Thanks. Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Sent you the article about pro-life feminism. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 16:51, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Ros! Back in January [4] Catholic Healthcare West changed its name to Dignity Health (and its management structure). Does the Category CHW just get "moved" to Category Dignity Health, or is it more complicated than that? Thanks. -- Kenatipo speak! 21:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Banu_Nadir I doubt your reason for keeping that tag is same as al-A's. al-A i assume wants more muslims sources like sealed nectar used, am assuming you dont-- Misconceptions2 ( talk) 02:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
"Does it not support your anti-Muslim agenda now?"....sigh. i have mainly used muslim sources in all my articles, the most anti muslim sources you can get. 11 of 16 refs in that article are muslim sources-- Misconceptions2 ( talk) 03:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Rush Limbaugh – Sandra Fluke controversy has had changes in the length of biographical description of Sandra Fluke. It is currently quite minimal. If you have an opinion on how much biographical material on Sandra Fluke should be in the article, you can offer it on the talk page. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 17:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Barry (Why don't we talk?) 07:17, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
If you do not agree with an aspect of an edit please do not do a wholesale undo. You may well be changing things that are uncontroversial and beneficial as what happened here Also, a controversial book in the United States that has not even banned does not have to be in Category:Censorship AND Category:Censorship in the United States. Please also note that I have created Category:Book censorship in the United States. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 04:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Please clarify your revert based on copyright issues re: revision 484380232 by Aduron78 having to do with RCC position on homosexuality. What was copyrighted here? Frankgyn ( talk) 21:02, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
How can you tell, and from where? Have you tried a search with large segments of the text to find an original online source? Perhaps this is a problem in multiple articles on wikipedia that needs to be addressed when discovered. Frankgyn ( talk) 02:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
In light of this [5], I thought you should know - since you obviously didn't read the exchange on the talk page - that I am only trying to find a simpler way to express the generalities. You're right: the source is 'silly'. I'm all for a better one, but we don't have it! The one expert (Sir William Jones) who writes of the Claddagh, as it happens, copied his text from an earlier source which was half wrong!— Djathink imacowboy 20:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Do not assume that the abortion articles were my own personal analysis before deleting all of them and do some research. You'll find that 3 million Quranist Muslims think the same way and if you need proof of this then go to any Quran alone website or sites such as Submission.org that are Islamic websites Also the section which said excerpts from 'Quran' and Hadith was wrong because it contained no excerpts from Quran and they were all from hadith. Do you even know the difference between the two sorts of books? I have changed it to just say 'Hadith' which is correct. The opinion of killing life from the Quranic perspective is completely forbidden, even abortion - unless it threatens the mother hosts life. I should be allowed to post Quranic excerpts on the page to highlight this.
EddyJawed ( talk) 18:39, 30 March 2012 (GMT)
Re [6], please review [7]. You're not playing the game right - you can't tell someone you are talking about them - you have to hint obliquely. Hipocrite ( talk) 20:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
For making the WP:BLP compliant edit at PLF. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 23:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Roscelese. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
I am not a Sockpuppet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nevermas ( talk • contribs) 02:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know that I plan on nominating the Shaima Alawadi article for deletion as non-notable. I will post here again when I actually figure out how to do it. I wanted to give you super-early notice so that you could provide more sources or evidence that this murder is independently notable. LedRush ( talk) 15:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I saw this morning that papers are speculating that this was an honor killing now. I think this is an extremely sensitive topic with huge and obvious BLP concerns. However, it seems odd to include the "hate crime" theory and not the "honor killing" theory. If the case turns out to be the latter, I doubt this story will have much legs and, consequently, would be deserving of an article. But as the article has survived the deletion process, I feel we have to address the issues in some manner. Anyway, I have only a passing knowledge of the events and thought that you might be better equipped to deal with this than I.
You didn't leave a link in the G12 Speedy Deletion template, although you did in the edit summary, your tag should read {{db-g12|http://www.saintaire.com/company}}, provided that is the URL it is a copyvio of. Cheers, -- kelapstick( bainuu) 23:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Worth keeping an eye on that en: → es: translation project. Strong smell of freeloading - see "Purpose". — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 10:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
So the secular summit is secular. Good to know. And maybe we can say the Pope is an atheist, because he doesn't worship the One True God?
If you want that section in there, take it to the talk page like you should have from the beginning. Since we can't seem to agree on what "the" means, it would be helpful to have other comments. You can also make a WP:RfC. — kwami ( talk) 03:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
adjectives, such as terrorist, criminal, monster, A-hole if you prefer Wp to have pages that are of lower quality. I prefer otherwise, but I'm not a warrior. Have it your way. Kokot.kokotisko ( talk) 16:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
dear roscelese,
i need your advice. there seems to be a tag-team consisting of User_talk:Plot_Spoiler and User:AnkhMorpork as they're backing up each others edits on controversial subjects [9], [10]. are there any arenas here on wiki were such behavior could be addressed?-- altetendekrabbe 21:27, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I encourage you to avoid leaving any commnent in my talk page, due in the past I have received some unacceptable rude comments from you, up to calling me an "idiot", some other users have complained about similar comments from you, and actually you have been blocked because of that sort of personal attacks, so perhaps you are too engaged with pro-abortion and too susceptible to fly off the handle so if any other user is really concerned about my doings let them do the job of warning me. -- ClaudioSantos ¿? 12:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Kenneth Uwadi is back. It was an article that you did a, AfD and was deleted. There are a couple of refs that talk about him, but after reading them, they seem dubious. I deleted other refs that were unreliable or didn't talk about him. I'm up in the air on what to do. Could do a speedy delete because of the previous AfD, but it looks like new sources might have been added. Could you take a look? You saw the last revision, so you would be a better judge than I. Bgwhite ( talk) 06:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
http://us.cnn.com/2012/04/26/us/indiana-in-vitro-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 I know there's a risk of recentism here; however, I'm not proposing to focus on just this one news article.
I think it is encyclopedic to discuss the church's stance towards human reproduction e.g. contraception and fertility treatments. I'd like to give it a treatment similar to the article on Catholic Church and abortion or Catholic Church and abortion in the United States. I notice that there is no article on Catholic Church and human reproduction. What do you think of that as a title for a new article? -- Pseudo-Richard ( talk) 02:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
I understand you have strong personal feelings on the matter, but Wikipedia entries should stay as neutral and impartial as possible, avoiding any strong, definitive statements and opinions. Anyways, I have started a section on the Talk page about it to discuss the matter further. Thanks. ChessPlayerLev ( talk) 05:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 04:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could give us your advice, as a senior editor, on the question of [11] notability in the case of Edward S. May. While the rules for biographies tells us the criteria, I believe long-term experience as a Wikipedia editor can help us make a judgment call. I'm not sure I have it right. I lean towards deletion but I hate to dampen the enthusiasm of the author of the article, another fairly new editor and grad student in anthropology. However, the integrity of Wikipedia comes first. I’d appreciate your advice. Jason from nyc ( talk) 12:20, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello Roscelese. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Unfolded Film to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 00:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Quick Note, War on Women has been renominated for Deletion-- 209.6.69.227 ( talk) 19:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. I would appreciate it if you could visit Talk:Muhammad. The article, Muhammad, has changed in a significant way since it originally passed WP:GA several years ago. It now states in the opening paragraph that Mohammad is the Founder of Islam and has relegated to a note at the end of the article that Muslims, themselves don't believe this. I have started a discussion on the talk page concerning this and would value your input. Thanks so much. Veritycheck ( talk) 21:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Could you give your opinion to edit by Eraserhead1? See [12] Ron 1987 ( talk) 01:18, 11 May 2012 (UTC)