This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What vandalism level she up to? I wonder if they'll block for 3 reverts, all things considered. I've done 2 so far.— Machine Elf 1735 ( talk) 15:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm trying to put something together to post to User:Machine Elf 1735/COIN. I have no clue what I'm doing.— Machine Elf 1735 ( talk) 00:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
The December 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 04:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
-- Kumioko ( talk) 03:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Just dropped by to say goodbye.
It is obvious to me that you really care about Wikipedia and that you were trying to do the best thing in a complex situation.
I would like to retract my comment about you not listening to admin. that was pretty harsh and unfair given that you seem to always strive to do the right thing.
I have finally just read through the archives at Machine Elf's talk page - which was not fun what a load of waffle - and I can see the issue.
I really respect what Wikipedia does for people, particularly how it provides information for free and I can see that the systems in place here are just set up to protect that.
Looking at the noticeboard situation, I think I did come in with a rude taunt at the end there which you simply responded to calmly.
ME, who started to endlessly rant and comment really needs to be restricted to a 'tweet' style of conversation. I think his style of interacting just leads to a lack of fresh content being developed really which seems a little bit counter productive as in analysis paralysis.
It's quite funny how the systems work here as in "they keep dragging me back in". I do go on original research tangents so I don't think I really fit in here.
Anyway, all the best and sorry to be mean - your the smartest person I met in this joint (not that I met many people) so I am sure you will go far. -- 94.175.145.18 ( talk) 00:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
You wrote "We do not reference talk pages." Why? TradingBands ( talk) 17:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to remove the superfluous information on David James (South African actor) Discussion page regarding external links since the subject was cleared up and it seems distracting, but I don't want to remove your comments without checking with you first. Bobbyandbeans ( talk) 23:55, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
A lyrics page is a secondary source. The song itself it the primary. The reference was not to establish notability but to establish validity. It's not a passing mentioning in the song, the entire song is about the need of a DeLorean time machine. -- Henriok ( talk) 23:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, on 31 May 2010 you edited Ptolemy Project (computing) and marked it as "external links". Your summary was "will try to come back and fix these external links later". I went ahead and removed the external links. If you approve of the page, could you remove the "external links" tag? Full disclosure: I work for the Ptolemy Project. Cxbrx ( talk) 19:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Joseph Rael, shamanism writer
as a notable person from
Picuris Pueblo. Perhaps you should also add at least a stub article about him so that his name will appear in
blue. This is often one of the tests that are applied when judging whether someone is notable or not. Einar aka
Carptrash (
talk) 18:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey Yworo, there's a lot of activity on the Yoshiyahu Yosef Pinto page. Would love to hear your input! -- Beobjectiveplease ( talk) 02:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing and reverting this so quickly! Someone didn't like me deleting their spammed article...! Talk page stalkers ftw! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 20:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Since the talk page should not become an interactive forum, I am responding here. I already apologized as my counting was apparently incorrect. I was hoping others would add the cites, but nobody did. If you would have posted on the talk page that you will start removing by a certain date, I would have added cites by that time. The way I read WP:BURDEN, it does suggest that the person looking for cites seek to find cites themselves. If you are not familiar with the subject though, it is probably a better idea to go to the talk page and ask others and remind them that the un-cited work will be removed aggressively. Thanks. Sposer ( talk) 21:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi - I'm not familiar with that term you used in your last edit summary for the 2001 article. Could you explain that? Shirtwaist ( talk) 11:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello! I saw you removing my templates questioning the merge between the two articles describing similarly located monasteries in Ladakh. Would you please give some explanation as to their being actually different objects? If it for some reason cannot fit into any of the articles (the relations of the supposedly neighboring structures may fit OK I guess) a line may be dropped here: Talk:Mashro Monastery.
Both monasteries' locations are "across from Thiksey Monastery" and so far the article texts lack any features to help differentiate between them. I placed the question in English wiki as result of an outside internet discussion, and I believe far wider readership circles may be confused. -- Tar-ba-gan ( talk) 19:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment! -- Tryptofish ( talk) 19:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Yworo, thanks for the tip. That whole page needs massive work, and I'm just beginning it, through introducing academically sourced material. My apologies if my edits made it appear that I was just randomnly deleting sections of the text, I was merely replacing them. ( Midnightblueowl ( talk) 23:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC))
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I added what I thought were helpful resources.
I am curious however why sites like Coffee Geek are allowed to remain as resources when they are clearly commercial sites only been around longer. In addition there is no relationship between their reference [3] and their URL.
This appears to be a huge problem with Wikipedia. I myself have had to delete self serving links. And just a quick cursory glance found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitling
Take a look at the first no-followed link in the second paragraph. This has been there since Feb. Seems that spammers are running rampant on Wikipedia adding non relevant links.
And I need to correct you about no-follow tags. Despite what search engines might "officially" say, they do help and help tremendously.
Best, Kwazeen ( talk) 00:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Go read the Table of Contents. Otero is the Editor of the Book, and the author of the cited chapter in a collected edition. Chomsky is the editor of the bulk of the chapters (thus "book author). Fifelfoo ( talk) 21:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Also, fixing them one at a time, great, now I have to peruse 260 or so references every time in order, applying the same editorial rules I've already previously applied until I realise that a single line item is missing a publisher location. That's really reduced my workload by reverting a large scale body of work. Fifelfoo ( talk) 21:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo, that was an impressive cleanup you performed on the videophone article, which was somewhat overdue. Just to let you know, I've reinstated the TeleType font to the A.G. Bell quotation due to its long standing use in the article to help readers understand they're viewing material extracted from another source. Alternate font usage is not forbidden in the MOS, with the proviso that it not be employed crazily. Best: HarryZilber ( talk) 05:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Just for the record, I have the same suspicions about this editor. Pretty interesting that, not long after I warned the IP for the conflict of interest and the legal threat, here comes a brand new registered user that picks right up editing where the IP left off. Strikerforce ( talk) 02:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | ||
For bringing some NPOV sanity into a crazy left-right food fight! CarolMooreDC ( talk) 02:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
You made a decent argument for deletion and I didn't find the "keep" arguments convincing. (the ZDnet review was a blog post) However, after 2 weeks you were the only one making a delete argument. My recommendation is to wait a few months and renominate. -- Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
hello. this is my first entry to a talk page and so may not be following all the guidelines. Re old entry to Richmond Outreach Center - why do you consider that Rick Ross is not a reliable source. If referencing the fact that there is controversy, then it is reliable. If referencing factual information, I agree that it is less than reliable. Seems to me to be important information to reference in a balanced article. Otherwise, it is just a PR piece. ----
Hi, I reverted your link to goldprice.org due to some wikipedia.org violations regarding anti-spam. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spam
if you actually go to www.goldprice.org you'll see that it is just a spam website, the gold prices they have listed are not even live.
GoldAlert is a reputable source and an authority on Gold news as cited by local and national news outlets.
Noeltazz ( talk) 21:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo.
First of all thanks for your contributions in
Murry Hope, was very nice. I have appreciated your help and everybody else contributing. Would be fantastic if everybody did real contributions like you (It’s pretty aggressive the attitude of some people in Wikipedia, I don’t believe Wikipedia can survive if that don’t change in short term).
I still can’t believe that “Murry” was wrong spelled as well as “Egypt”. I need some sleep. Regarding the issue of “Living people” I suspect that the name “Murry Hope” might be a pseudonym. Would be necessary find a birth certificate to confirm (I couldn’t find one).
The article now also has been improved with much more references (more than enough, likely). Obviously you know that it is a worth article, you spent your time in it. Would be possible also you put your “keep” in discussion: (
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Murry_Hope#Murry_Hope)?
But please be comfortable, doesn’t matter if you don’t want.
You are welcome, needing a help for an article call me (I will do my best). Best,
Hour of Angels (
talk) 02:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
He was actually pretty well known in the 70s and 80s, remember to do a Google News search in the archives before prodding. Prod is only for uncontroversial deletion. Fences& Windows 21:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
p.s. You've got a Kilroy was here userbox, did you know about {{ User kilroy was here}}? Fences& Windows 22:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
This is a note to let you know that I have mentioned you here. I am not calling for any action to be taken against you. I am merely expressing my concerns over the thread that transpired here. I just thought I should tell you that you have been mentioned, nothing more. Bus stop ( talk) 22:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
I did not change much. Only reason why i did any thing is because i saw it needed changes and the actual categories them self say they need changes. It did not affect anything really. I wont do it no more. Program Death ( talk) 18:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
This file File:Hopper Rider.jpg that you commented on at FfD has been re-listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 April 28#File:Hopper Rider.jpg Please see the discussion to see why this is. Skier Dude ( talk) 01:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo, how are you? You have helped me with several issues (few time ago), now recently I had an unexpected problem, may ask you for some help again, guidance and advice in this list of doubts?
1- An article in Wikipedia can be written using famous paintings (under public domain) as essential and most part of it? I mean the subject it is not directly about painting but they have implicated relations. So, may I use them not only for article’s illustration but also as a massive and important part of it? If yes, an editor can immediately (without any discussion) remove these images (and esthetically wrecking the article) if he has another point of view? (vandalism?)
2- An editor can immediately (without any previous discussion) remove parts (script) of an article if he has another point of view over some (referenced) sentence? (vandalism?)
3- When an editor claims that didn’t find a reference (even if it near exists in the article), he can immediately remove the paragraph without first asking for it? (vandalism?)
4- A text (supposed with neutral point of view) with a statement made in a valid reference can simply be removed because the editor has another personal interpretation for it? (vandalism?)
5- A non-English reference is it a valid reference? If yes, an editor can immediately remove a paragraph if didn’t find an English reference? (vandalism?)
6- Any editor can judge and decide (according to his personal believes and grade of knowledge) what is related (or not) to an article and immediately remove without first discussing the question? (vandalism?)
7- An editor can remove parts (with multiple references) of an article leaving other parts with orphaned references? (vandalism?)
8- If a reference (of another part) was misplaced in a sentence, an editor can immediately erase the paragraph without first asking for a revision? (vandalism?)
9- Is it usual a steady Wikipedia’s article (constantly improved by numerous users and created many months or years ago) suddenly (in one only day, probably by same person with more than one username) be flooded with impolite demands and amputated like described here?
Thanks Yworo, these are very important and determinant questions to me (and to many others editors, for sure). The affected article in question concerns the subject of ethereal entities (gods, spirits, angels, etc.), now seriously wrecked. Hour of Angels ( talk) 14:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I am User:Iapx86 the youngest son of Jerome Y Lettvin. Jerry just died on March 23rd, and I updated his wikipedia entry. He was far more influential than is currently shown in the article.
I have direct verifiable information that I inserted in this page. However, your edits have been so severe that I hardly trust trying again.
For instance, I had inserted the names of his doctoral_students and influences/influenced in the article. Your action then was to remove the entire list of names and say wikipedia is not a directory. So I reviewed the entry and inserted the names of his doctoral_students in the infobox:scientist. Your criticism was that URLs do not belong in this section. Your action was to remove the entire list of names rather than strip them of their links. If the infobox:scientist doctoral_students section is not the right place for the names of his doctoral students where should such a list be inserted? And if links are not given, how can the information be called verifiable? The dissertations of ALL of these students is now in the archives of the American Philosophical Society. Most of his doctoral students have gone on to substantial careers in the neurosciences.
The material I am inserting is first hand knowledge and verifiable by his students. I am entirely open to criticism and advice on improving my entries. But I am now uncertain that you will not simply remove everything I insert. Please help me improve my delivery to avoid these removals. iapx86 04:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iapx86 ( talk • contribs)
Sorry about both elements. I know better. On the second - the surnames of his wives, I put a placeholder for his wives as a way of reminding myself while working on it, as I expected to be able to find their names. Have not been able to yet, and meant to delete the "xxxs". Parkwells ( talk) 16:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your contribution to one of wikipedia's latest WP:GA's
This user helped promote Sam Fuld to good article status. |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:35, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the error on the first; was trying to distinguish Gorman and Martin, certainly, from the early 20th c. artists; should have indicated later 20th c. Parkwells ( talk) 14:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I have no opinion on this matter and I could not care less, I reverted the IP because a quick search showed that there were obvious links between the two, including links that were admitted by Heinlein himself. I you feel the information is questionable, fine. Asavaa ( talk) 16:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for jumping on board with the expansion, ref documentation, etc. of the colony (one of my most favorite places on Earth). As an FYI, I'm going to be adding references - and there's the non-referenced template that I'll leave up until then - so you need not work that I'll catch them all, I will.-- CaroleHenson ( talk) 17:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Fixed. Please feel free to edit or add a citation needed tag as needed. Thanks, The Fire Tones 14:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok. The Fire Tones 16:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
According to the guideline on lists, they serve three main purposes, of which navigation is but one. The other two are information and development. That is squarely where redlinks fall. If you wish to debate the purpose of lists please take this conversation to the MoS talk page, or propose an AfD for the list to promote other editors' contributions. Thank you. • Freechild talk 00:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
As it happens, I'd added the {{afdanons}} template. Tothwolf removed it, I restored it, and he removed it again. Thanks for putting it back up, but it's time to take this to ANI, I think. ῲ Ravenswing ῴ 03:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (Apologies, but since I mentioned that you put the template back up, I felt it necessary to alert you.) ῲ Ravenswing ῴ 03:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the warning.
Eric567 ( talk) 16:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi. You helped me out a few weeks ago, and I thought you might again. (Actually, I wish I knew of a common wikipedia page where questions like these could be put and answered.)
I sometimes come across articles that look as though they were translated from another language by somebody not quite fluent in English. My current example: Chalcolithic; in fact, I see that the first entry in its history is 15:43, 25 February 2002 Conversion script (talk) m (382 bytes) (Automated conversion)
Do you know if there are accepted ways of marking such articles, something like {{bad english}}? Obviously, one solution is for me to fix it myself, but (a) I don't have time right now, and (b) I'm not sure I can rephrase some of the text without inadvertently changing the meaning. Bloody Viking ( talk) 20:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
User:Yworo has asked the editor using IPs 76.121.180.74 and 24.17.63.79 not to post on this talk page; please have the courtesy to respect this and use the article talk pages instead. Like all users, Yworo has the right to remove any material from this page and will, I assume, continue to do so. Material will be more visible and permanent on article talk pages where it cannot be refactored in this way. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 00:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Thaksinocracy, as per policy an article that has ever been discussed at AfD is ineligible for deletion via prod. I did this only to comply with policy; do not interpret this action as an endorsement for keeping this article. If you still wish to pursue deletion, please open another AfD. — KuyaBriBri Talk 03:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Please see WP:HD#How do I work out what the problem is re Capitalization?. Thanks, Chzz ► 10:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for doing something with that paragraph dealing with Animist faiths in the Spiritualist article. It didn't fit in the article but I was not sure what to do with it. Tom Butler ( talk) 17:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Please don't stuff around with capitalization on CDC CYBER related pages. The correct spelling in this context is all capitals "CYBER" not "Cyber". The CDC CYBER was a mainframe computer manufactured by Control Data Corporation between about 1970 to 1992. The company always used the word CYBER all capitalized. Thanks. Tom. Cdccyber ( talk) 12:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
It was recently suggested that WikiProject New Mexico, to which you are a member, may be inactive or semi-active and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there haven't been much active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. Another user has added the project to the WPUS template and I added it to the list of supported projects in the WPUS main project page but before I take any further action I wanted to contact each of the active members for their input. -- Kumioko ( talk) 15:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
As stated on my talk page, I do have reason to believe sock puppetry is involved with the blocked username in question. Because the majority of this particular drama is taking on Facebook and outside of Wikipedia, I wouldn't expect Wikipedia's admins to have first-hand knowledge of this. The username in question was used to intentionally slander the person whose name it was opened under, "Jessica Darling." I sent a message last week to Wikipedia's admins asking for the IP address of the username, but my request was rebuffed; they feel that the person using the name of "Jessica Darling" should contact them directly instead. -- Modemac ( talk) 18:20, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your help and the barnstar. Much appreciated. - Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 21:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
The subject, or a friend, may add or correct their own birthday, and correct other information that is not controversial, as was done at Michael Walker (knifemaker), see Wikipedia:Autobiography#Problems_in_an_article_about_you. User:Fred Bauder Talk 00:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi
While I appreciate the points you have made, do you know a way to get around the gallery problem of alt= and alt text?
If you can, then having changed them into galleries will be ok, if not then there is still going to be a problem. Chaosdruid ( talk) 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
The links I added on the Chee Soo page are directly relevant to the article, the publisher is non-profit making and what is more they have an extensive online mediawiki with almost all of the author's published works on there to read free of charge. -- Chuangzu ( talk) 19:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Wow, looking at contribs that must have been annoying to clean up. You have to feel for some people. My first articles were deleted and I felt annoyed at Wikipedia, but I soon learnt the notability guideline, not how to troll others. Sorry about the hassle. PS what did it take to get your talk page autoconfirmed? I've been vandalised once or twice during vandal fighting. -- Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 14:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like the newbie at User talk:66.108.86.141 doesn't understand your process. I hope you'll take a moment to enlighten them as to your editing process. Thanks. • Freechild talk 22:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
awesome box at the top of this page, well-reasoned approach to anons. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Are you finished hounding my edits now? You've already been humiliated twice. Please, I encourage you to try a third time. RonaldMerchant ( talk) 01:52, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you were instrumental in helping clean up the entry Tara Brach. I am trying to get the page to comply with Wikipedia's guidelines as much as possible and would love your assistance even though you must be quite busy. I have one question in particular - Tara Brach has been cited in several scholarly journals that can only be accessed on a per-fee basis. If one were to buy the journal article in question citing Tara Brach's work as a psychologist and meditation teacher, could that article be cited even though it's not available to the general public and therefore hard for other editors to review? Thanks in advance for your help. Sueanne0310 ( talk) 22:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
When did I place the template in a section by itself? Reviewing both of my edits ( [1], [2]), the only change to the commons link was to change it to a link to the actual category page. In what was its section location changed? Nightscream ( talk) 09:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
You may care to have a look at the current version of this article, which seems to me to be more promotional than encyclopedic. Thanks,
Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 01:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. I did not know that there was an "inclusion criteria". All I could see on the discussion page was an agreement between 5 users. I personally think that it is pointless creating a list of Buddhist temples with wikipedia articles. There is a different page for that, it is called Category. Also, Lalitpur submetropolitan city website lists the majority of the deleted Buddhist shrines as UNESCO world heritage monuments (within UNESCO world heritage site Kathmandu valley). A reference to the page was also provided during the edit. I see no point excluding UNESCO world heritage monuments just because they do not have an article. Thank you. Cheers!-- Eukesh ( talk) 19:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm looking for people to help maintain outlines. I noticed you did some work on this one awhile back. Would you watchlist this? Please look it over again to help it keep up with Wikipedia's growing coverage of the subject. I look forward to your reply. The Transhumanist 02:40, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
I've added some different outside sources citing information about Lake Superior Zendo. I also added some information about a short-lived scandal involving a Episcopalian Bishop. However, LSZ was only implicated incidentally, and I'm not sure if the information belongs there or in an article about Episcopalian syncretism, or if it only needs to be reworded. There is a huge amount of coverage about the subject (for having happened in the UP of Mich.), but few of the articles name LSZ. Could you suggest where the information belongs, or possibly edit the wording? I'll mention this problem in the discussion page, as well. Thank you. Terrencereilly ( talk) 18:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Sorry I didn't realize right away that the List of Buddhist temples need to have an article written about them. Some other pages, like photographers, work like that, so it is a good idea. Do you think I can include an article made of sanghas in San Diego that people can add to? None of them seem to be notable on their own in my opinion except Deer Park Monastery which already has its own article (except maybe the Dharma Bums because they have three organizations in San Diego). Thanks for your thoughts. - SusanLesch ( talk) 21:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Most of these architects are known by first name. I edited the article List of Bangladeshi architects from practical experience. I wish you think about it again. Rossi101 ( talk) 17:11, 5 November 2011 (UTC) Rossi101
I reverted your edit, but I ask you if you can take a look at the new section on the relevant talk page for your opinion, I also requested mediation from an uninvolved administrator in order to help resolve the issue. Sheodred ( talk) 18:32, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm not a proponent of Wikipedia:UKNAT, btw. GoodDay ( talk) 22:31, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
You are entirely correct. I hadn't really looked at that section for a while. I have now added a sentence with reference to the rebuttal of these theories at "RationalWiki" which in turn cites Prison Planet, etc., so if the user wants to find the promulgators, they can either reference the Cracked.com article or the rationalwiki article.-- WickerGuy ( talk) 22:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I see you've already reverted a few additions by the IP on the Reeves article. Could you possibly review their other edits as they've removed some material as well such as the name of her spouse and are keen on using her first name. I restored the material once already and issued guidance but the IP reverted that and input from another editor would be useful. Thanks.-- Shakehandsman ( talk) 19:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The identification of Judaism as a religion is, as was mentioned in the talk page, a tricky issue. See Who is a Jew? for more information on how a person may be born Jewish, become a practicing Hindu, Muslim, or Catholic, and still be a Jew according to halakh and Israeli law.-- Louiedog ( talk) 19:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, this is to let you know that there is an important discussion taking place in the WP:Astrology project, which affects the guidelines for content and sources on astrology-related pages. This requires input from its members. It would be very much appreciated if you could leave a comment/express your views on the issues raised.
The link to the discussion is here.
Hope you can find time to add a few thoughts
Thank you, -- Zac Δ talk! 14:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Yworo! How does one get the stickers like those on the right-hand side of your page? I notice some people have them, others don't. I've done a lot of minor editing over the last six years but I've just started having my own page here. Axel ( talk) 19:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I've started a section at Richard Reames talk page about the citations need. ?oygul ( talk) 02:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
WP:AN3#User:174.99.127.20 reported by Yworo (talk) (Result: ). There is no good option for admin action that I can see, based on what you have written. The IP-hopping editor can't be easily blocked. We are unlikely to semiprotect an SPI against the person charged. The SPI itself lists a bunch of articles where you think the IP has been misbehaving, including Richard Stallman and C. S. Lewis. If you could make a proper case, it might be justified to semiprotect some of those articles. But some evidence for each article would be needed. If you agree with this approach, consider expanding your 3RR request to justify their protection. EdJohnston ( talk) 16:20, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Do you live in Seattle? I saw that you edit Seattle-area articles.
I would like to invite you to attend a Wikipedia meetup described on Wikipedia:Meetup/seattlewp. This meeting is scheduled for 7pm Tuesday December 6 in Cafe Allegro. Thank you for your attention and I hope to see you there. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it. I found it in the Commons last night by accident. I had no idea it was there when I first wrote the article and was concerned about getting a photo of one of his knives. He onlydoes 2 shows a year and I don't make it to either.-- Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 23:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I have added a couple of references from primary literature, as requested. Perhaps you can help me by tidying up the snytax -- I don't have much experience with citations & Co.
Dulciana ( talk) 21:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
A user called Fred Braches has created a page called Slumach and another page called Pitt Lake gold find. On Fred Braches talk page he states that he has a slumach website. The articles Slumach and Pitt Lake gold find links directly to his website. Fred Braches is using the articles to advertise his website. Is this a conflict of interest. His website is located on the external links section of Slumach and Pitt Lake gold find. It looks like he is advertising a book on his website. Msruzicka ( talk) 21:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Please be less insistent on having things your way.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 02:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could evaluate the new sources that I added to the AfD. SL93 ( talk) 22:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
The book exists. However, the editor who cited the book did so specifically to support the inclusion of "semenancy", which is not mentioned in the book.
To claim that (book X) supports (statement Y), when (book X) makes no mention whatsoever of (statement Y), is to make a false reference. DS ( talk) 19:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Curious what your deal is with the Raymond Salvatore Harmon page I created. I have also noticed a pattern of you removing cited references to him without reason from other wikipages in order to orphan that page. In particular the Stan Brakhage page.
While you complain that I reverted your "work" most of the columns you "fixed" were in fact tables that can be sorted either way chronologically. Additionally you removed a ton of reference links to his work that took me much time in hunting down and adding to this page. While you complain that I reverted your work you have spent a considerable amount of time attacking a page I have been working on for years without consideration.
So, do you have an excuse for your behavior or is it another case of "wikilord will rule the interwebs!"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creatcher ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
You still haven't addressed the issue I am raising which is that you have deliberately looked for and removed as many references to Raymond Salvatore Harmon on wikipedia as you could find. In doing so you seem to be showing a kind of behavior that is unbecoming to someone who truly wants to improve the wiki community. Having now spent a bit of time looking through your editing history and past interactions with other editors and contributors to wikipedia I am concerned about a focused attempt that you are making toward changing articles related to esoterism, occultism, and specific filmmakers and artists who interact with those fields.
From other discussions and issues I have seen here on wikipedia (related to your user name) it would appear your actions are deliberate and meant not to make wikipedia a better place but to reinforce certain concepts, downplay certain people involved in these fields, and overall change historic fact for personal research on a large scale.
I would like you to address this question. Are you changing articles to reflect an altered version of what is referenced data in order to downplay certain people, and or change how wikipedia represents historic fact involving these fields? It certainly would appear so. Creatcher ( talk) 23:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo - I have just noticed that you changed the article titles to be enclosed by double quotes not single quotes. I want to explain the situaion so you don't mind that I change them back. Unaware that you had done this, but with other quote issues in mind, I raised a question yesterday morning about the use of the quotes in the article, was subsequently informed that its OK to follow the format of using single quotes for article titles, and then I posted some typographical conventions to keep a note of what is being consistently applied in the article. See also this post which came over the discussion on the FA discussion page, saying the single quotes should be retained.
It is only this morning that I notice you changed the quotes in the citation box yesterday. I think the footnotes and citations should be consistent with each other, and it will be an easy job to change the quotes in the Works cited panel, but a hell of a job picking through all the code to change the style in the inline citations. The reason I want to explain this is so you don't think I am thoughtlessly reverting your edit. So hope that's OK. And thanks for adding the sister project links - I was struggling with that -- Zac Δ talk! 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate the work you've done, your edits on different articles keep coming up on my watchlist (and my watchlist isn't too big) — but right now I'm going to have to ask you to slow down a bit, you're putting a lot of work on me. I don't know of anyone else who's ready to immediately do the actual research on these subjects, and I'd prefer to concentrate on one or two subjects at a time without the pressure. Maybe refrain from AfD'ing on this topic for the next week or so? Please? — Jeraphine Gryphon ( talk) 16:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what an imprint is. — Jeraphine Gryphon ( talk) 07:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Has been deleted. you can go ahead with your move. -- GraemeL (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate your input on all the pix at Lady Lilith. You may be right in removing some of them. I'll ask that you describe the issues on the talkpage. I may revisit the illustrations. My basic feeling is that this is an article about an illustration, how it developed, and was then displayed, so that lots of illustrations are required. But I'll wait awhile to let my mind clear first. Smallbones ( talk) 02:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi.
I'm not sure if you saw, but I got an answer to your question, via the helpdesk and the Village Pump;
.page-Special_Watchlist .mw-rollback-link {display:none}
Hope that helps. Chzz ► 12:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo. I think we have agreed and disagreed but your contributions have greatly benefited the project and respect to you for that. I hope you won't allow this issue to upset you longer than necessary and that you will return to contributing in the near future. Best wishes and happy holidays. Youreallycan ( talk) 18:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Well done dude - don't let it get to you. Ignore them, rise above it, don't reply in kind. Youreallycan ( talk) 23:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
I've closed the ANI thread. If it happens again, don't be drawn into an argument: ping an admin directly with the evidence. I'm not sure whether there's a long-term solution, but assuming said IP isn't so obsessed that he starts rapidly swapping IPs a block or two should encourage him to find something more productive to do with his time than following you around. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of StarWind Software. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Hu12 ( talk) 16:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
For converting my bunch of amazon.com book URLs to ISBN / text view during the work on the article marked AfD. That's pure altruism and and excellent example of a team work. Thank you for your efforts! APS (Full Auto) ( talk) 23:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks for weighing in at this discussion. I made a serious proposal to Yakushima; I'm naive enough to think it has a chance. If we get to the next level, one of the conditions I'll ask for is participation in a community discussion about footnotes in infoboxes. I think it is clear they should be avoided, but I'd like to see a robust community discussion about when exceptions are warranted. I'd also like to see a discussion about what qualifies as an influence. I'll go along with what the community wants, but I think the inclusion criteria should be a little tighter than "I found a ref that says the views of X were somehow affected by the views of Y". I think the threshold should be stronger than that.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 13:54, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
On a different subject, I just read your rationale for semi protection of this page. Very interesting. I'm not quite ready to adopt it myself, maybe I've been lucky and haven't had much interaction with IPs, but it poses a concept (communication power imbalance), I hadn't considered before.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 16:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
looking like this use is not here to contribute content - it's primary function appears to attaching you - one of the sadder parts of anyone can edit, our open environment. Youreallycan ( talk) 18:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi all. I saw the report on WP:AIV and have been thinking about what to do while I was at the gym. The account User:Irolnire has not edited an article since September and has stated that they have no intention of editing an article again. So their sole purpose here seems to be to harass Yworo. I am gonna indef-block on that basis. I have these IPs so far and will range-block if the harassment continues: I record them here for future reference:
Please continue to collect any further IPs used as the more info we have, the tighter the range blocks, and the less collateral damage. Please post on my talk page if/when the user reappears; or send a note to Drmies; he is almost always around. Regards, -- Dianna ( talk) 04:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Hey, it's always great to collaborate with a fellow veteran editor who can throw in a good cite! -- Tenebrae ( talk) 03:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Check out the external links on Bob Timberlake (artist). One of the links is a furniture store and the other link is advertising merchandise for sale. Bob Timberlake official website is advertising merchandise for sale including lamps etc... Msruzicka ( talk) 07:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I was working on an article called Albert Ostman. Some have questioned it's notability. Is the article notable, what is your opinion? Msruzicka ( talk) 08:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick word of thanks for your small-but-helpful fixes to [[Peter Nygård]]. It is hard to catch such things without a lot more experience...
Alexthepuffin ( talk) 14:52, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Demi Moore and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, Tenebrae ( talk) 15:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
I've started a discussion on the IP at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed community ban for a harrassing IP. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
The statement at the beginning did indeed say "currently." Please look it up. I'm not talking about anything but use of the word "currently" in violation of WP:DATED. If you want to repeat the same words about citizenship twice in one paragraph, by all means, go ahead. I'm removing your uncivil post from my talk page.-- Tenebrae ( talk) 01:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
...just want to say that it's nice to see us, twice now, in agreement (re: Charlize above and Grant Morrison). Emotions aside, I know we have in common that we care for this wonderful, altruistic project, WIkipedia, very much, and we're making the concrete contribution of our time and effort. So maybe we'll be able to find common ground sometime. In the meantime, I would like to wish you happy holidays. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Could you check out the article Cadborosaurus willsi. Information was added which was not cited and some information was cited to Youtube videos. Can youtube videos be used as a references? Msruzicka ( talk) 06:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Somebody has cited a video as a reference in the Cadborosaurus willsi article again. Although the video does not appear to be from youtube. Msruzicka ( talk) 08:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Is the article North Carolina Barbecue Society notable? Msruzicka ( talk) 05:55, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I've had to modify your userbox per Wikipedia:Userpages#Images, which doesn't allow sexually provocative images. I have replaced it with another that should carry the same meaning. Sorry. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 17:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Malleus Fatuorum was unblocked by a fellow Arbitration clerk in order to participate in the request for arbitration. Malleus himself requested twice to be reblocked, which was granted, and has since made it perfectly clear that he does not wish to be unblocked. Your userbox, to my mind, serves no purpose other than to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. -- Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 18:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Don't panic. :) There's a discussion there about someone's alleged "attack page". Your documentation page, User:Yworo/IP incident record, strikes me as a model for the right way to build up a case. I have to say that I have not yet looked at the details of the complaint, but once I do, I would like to cite your page. If that's OK with you. :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the article Homeland Stupidity under G10 instead of G3, since it was clearly a page meant to attack Homeland Security. Keep in mind that it's better to tag attack pages under G10, because they're prioritized for speedy deletion and blanked.-- Slon02 ( talk) 04:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
I understand the policy. The dispute here is about terms. I feel your deletion of the polyfidelitous section was retaliation against me for adding back two names you removed. Polyamory is a wider term - you could have at least copied the polyfideltious section into the main list instead of totally deleting it. I am feeling physically sick right now because of your targeted actions towards me. Cooltobekind ( talk) 03:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I never falsified any references you bully!!! I took my time and researched they were in relationships with multiple people. You say one thing for living, and are now holding the dead to the same standard - when the authors of these academic texts clearly state they were in consenting relationships with multiple people Cooltobekind ( talk) 06:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I've requested a dispute resolution team to clarify the issues. 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 " List of polyamorists". Thank you.
thank you for your contribution! however i had the excess space there because the expand button interfere with the TOC. Abc123456person ( talk) 22:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
i will remove the links. however this will take a long time as i need to keep them as references for replacement internal links. Abc123456person ( talk) 19:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
you have been invited to find the elusive camocat! he is hiding on my user page. Abc123456person ( talk) 19:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you have re-instated the split tag. I think it was removed because there was a marginal concensus not to split (see the talk page). I am only interested, because I have been trying to clear up the backlog of split tags and now this one has suddenly re-appeared. If you have a clear idea of how to split the article then I suggest that you do so, the split tag is already over a year and a half old. Op47 ( talk) 19:10, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to canvas you again. Is the article The Group 1965 notable? Msruzicka ( talk) 02:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What vandalism level she up to? I wonder if they'll block for 3 reverts, all things considered. I've done 2 so far.— Machine Elf 1735 ( talk) 15:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm trying to put something together to post to User:Machine Elf 1735/COIN. I have no clue what I'm doing.— Machine Elf 1735 ( talk) 00:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
The December 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 04:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
-- Kumioko ( talk) 03:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Just dropped by to say goodbye.
It is obvious to me that you really care about Wikipedia and that you were trying to do the best thing in a complex situation.
I would like to retract my comment about you not listening to admin. that was pretty harsh and unfair given that you seem to always strive to do the right thing.
I have finally just read through the archives at Machine Elf's talk page - which was not fun what a load of waffle - and I can see the issue.
I really respect what Wikipedia does for people, particularly how it provides information for free and I can see that the systems in place here are just set up to protect that.
Looking at the noticeboard situation, I think I did come in with a rude taunt at the end there which you simply responded to calmly.
ME, who started to endlessly rant and comment really needs to be restricted to a 'tweet' style of conversation. I think his style of interacting just leads to a lack of fresh content being developed really which seems a little bit counter productive as in analysis paralysis.
It's quite funny how the systems work here as in "they keep dragging me back in". I do go on original research tangents so I don't think I really fit in here.
Anyway, all the best and sorry to be mean - your the smartest person I met in this joint (not that I met many people) so I am sure you will go far. -- 94.175.145.18 ( talk) 00:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
You wrote "We do not reference talk pages." Why? TradingBands ( talk) 17:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to remove the superfluous information on David James (South African actor) Discussion page regarding external links since the subject was cleared up and it seems distracting, but I don't want to remove your comments without checking with you first. Bobbyandbeans ( talk) 23:55, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
A lyrics page is a secondary source. The song itself it the primary. The reference was not to establish notability but to establish validity. It's not a passing mentioning in the song, the entire song is about the need of a DeLorean time machine. -- Henriok ( talk) 23:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, on 31 May 2010 you edited Ptolemy Project (computing) and marked it as "external links". Your summary was "will try to come back and fix these external links later". I went ahead and removed the external links. If you approve of the page, could you remove the "external links" tag? Full disclosure: I work for the Ptolemy Project. Cxbrx ( talk) 19:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Joseph Rael, shamanism writer
as a notable person from
Picuris Pueblo. Perhaps you should also add at least a stub article about him so that his name will appear in
blue. This is often one of the tests that are applied when judging whether someone is notable or not. Einar aka
Carptrash (
talk) 18:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey Yworo, there's a lot of activity on the Yoshiyahu Yosef Pinto page. Would love to hear your input! -- Beobjectiveplease ( talk) 02:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing and reverting this so quickly! Someone didn't like me deleting their spammed article...! Talk page stalkers ftw! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 20:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Since the talk page should not become an interactive forum, I am responding here. I already apologized as my counting was apparently incorrect. I was hoping others would add the cites, but nobody did. If you would have posted on the talk page that you will start removing by a certain date, I would have added cites by that time. The way I read WP:BURDEN, it does suggest that the person looking for cites seek to find cites themselves. If you are not familiar with the subject though, it is probably a better idea to go to the talk page and ask others and remind them that the un-cited work will be removed aggressively. Thanks. Sposer ( talk) 21:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi - I'm not familiar with that term you used in your last edit summary for the 2001 article. Could you explain that? Shirtwaist ( talk) 11:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello! I saw you removing my templates questioning the merge between the two articles describing similarly located monasteries in Ladakh. Would you please give some explanation as to their being actually different objects? If it for some reason cannot fit into any of the articles (the relations of the supposedly neighboring structures may fit OK I guess) a line may be dropped here: Talk:Mashro Monastery.
Both monasteries' locations are "across from Thiksey Monastery" and so far the article texts lack any features to help differentiate between them. I placed the question in English wiki as result of an outside internet discussion, and I believe far wider readership circles may be confused. -- Tar-ba-gan ( talk) 19:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment! -- Tryptofish ( talk) 19:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Yworo, thanks for the tip. That whole page needs massive work, and I'm just beginning it, through introducing academically sourced material. My apologies if my edits made it appear that I was just randomnly deleting sections of the text, I was merely replacing them. ( Midnightblueowl ( talk) 23:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC))
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I added what I thought were helpful resources.
I am curious however why sites like Coffee Geek are allowed to remain as resources when they are clearly commercial sites only been around longer. In addition there is no relationship between their reference [3] and their URL.
This appears to be a huge problem with Wikipedia. I myself have had to delete self serving links. And just a quick cursory glance found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitling
Take a look at the first no-followed link in the second paragraph. This has been there since Feb. Seems that spammers are running rampant on Wikipedia adding non relevant links.
And I need to correct you about no-follow tags. Despite what search engines might "officially" say, they do help and help tremendously.
Best, Kwazeen ( talk) 00:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Go read the Table of Contents. Otero is the Editor of the Book, and the author of the cited chapter in a collected edition. Chomsky is the editor of the bulk of the chapters (thus "book author). Fifelfoo ( talk) 21:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Also, fixing them one at a time, great, now I have to peruse 260 or so references every time in order, applying the same editorial rules I've already previously applied until I realise that a single line item is missing a publisher location. That's really reduced my workload by reverting a large scale body of work. Fifelfoo ( talk) 21:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo, that was an impressive cleanup you performed on the videophone article, which was somewhat overdue. Just to let you know, I've reinstated the TeleType font to the A.G. Bell quotation due to its long standing use in the article to help readers understand they're viewing material extracted from another source. Alternate font usage is not forbidden in the MOS, with the proviso that it not be employed crazily. Best: HarryZilber ( talk) 05:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Just for the record, I have the same suspicions about this editor. Pretty interesting that, not long after I warned the IP for the conflict of interest and the legal threat, here comes a brand new registered user that picks right up editing where the IP left off. Strikerforce ( talk) 02:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | ||
For bringing some NPOV sanity into a crazy left-right food fight! CarolMooreDC ( talk) 02:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
You made a decent argument for deletion and I didn't find the "keep" arguments convincing. (the ZDnet review was a blog post) However, after 2 weeks you were the only one making a delete argument. My recommendation is to wait a few months and renominate. -- Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
hello. this is my first entry to a talk page and so may not be following all the guidelines. Re old entry to Richmond Outreach Center - why do you consider that Rick Ross is not a reliable source. If referencing the fact that there is controversy, then it is reliable. If referencing factual information, I agree that it is less than reliable. Seems to me to be important information to reference in a balanced article. Otherwise, it is just a PR piece. ----
Hi, I reverted your link to goldprice.org due to some wikipedia.org violations regarding anti-spam. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spam
if you actually go to www.goldprice.org you'll see that it is just a spam website, the gold prices they have listed are not even live.
GoldAlert is a reputable source and an authority on Gold news as cited by local and national news outlets.
Noeltazz ( talk) 21:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo.
First of all thanks for your contributions in
Murry Hope, was very nice. I have appreciated your help and everybody else contributing. Would be fantastic if everybody did real contributions like you (It’s pretty aggressive the attitude of some people in Wikipedia, I don’t believe Wikipedia can survive if that don’t change in short term).
I still can’t believe that “Murry” was wrong spelled as well as “Egypt”. I need some sleep. Regarding the issue of “Living people” I suspect that the name “Murry Hope” might be a pseudonym. Would be necessary find a birth certificate to confirm (I couldn’t find one).
The article now also has been improved with much more references (more than enough, likely). Obviously you know that it is a worth article, you spent your time in it. Would be possible also you put your “keep” in discussion: (
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Murry_Hope#Murry_Hope)?
But please be comfortable, doesn’t matter if you don’t want.
You are welcome, needing a help for an article call me (I will do my best). Best,
Hour of Angels (
talk) 02:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
He was actually pretty well known in the 70s and 80s, remember to do a Google News search in the archives before prodding. Prod is only for uncontroversial deletion. Fences& Windows 21:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
p.s. You've got a Kilroy was here userbox, did you know about {{ User kilroy was here}}? Fences& Windows 22:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
This is a note to let you know that I have mentioned you here. I am not calling for any action to be taken against you. I am merely expressing my concerns over the thread that transpired here. I just thought I should tell you that you have been mentioned, nothing more. Bus stop ( talk) 22:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
I did not change much. Only reason why i did any thing is because i saw it needed changes and the actual categories them self say they need changes. It did not affect anything really. I wont do it no more. Program Death ( talk) 18:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
This file File:Hopper Rider.jpg that you commented on at FfD has been re-listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 April 28#File:Hopper Rider.jpg Please see the discussion to see why this is. Skier Dude ( talk) 01:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo, how are you? You have helped me with several issues (few time ago), now recently I had an unexpected problem, may ask you for some help again, guidance and advice in this list of doubts?
1- An article in Wikipedia can be written using famous paintings (under public domain) as essential and most part of it? I mean the subject it is not directly about painting but they have implicated relations. So, may I use them not only for article’s illustration but also as a massive and important part of it? If yes, an editor can immediately (without any discussion) remove these images (and esthetically wrecking the article) if he has another point of view? (vandalism?)
2- An editor can immediately (without any previous discussion) remove parts (script) of an article if he has another point of view over some (referenced) sentence? (vandalism?)
3- When an editor claims that didn’t find a reference (even if it near exists in the article), he can immediately remove the paragraph without first asking for it? (vandalism?)
4- A text (supposed with neutral point of view) with a statement made in a valid reference can simply be removed because the editor has another personal interpretation for it? (vandalism?)
5- A non-English reference is it a valid reference? If yes, an editor can immediately remove a paragraph if didn’t find an English reference? (vandalism?)
6- Any editor can judge and decide (according to his personal believes and grade of knowledge) what is related (or not) to an article and immediately remove without first discussing the question? (vandalism?)
7- An editor can remove parts (with multiple references) of an article leaving other parts with orphaned references? (vandalism?)
8- If a reference (of another part) was misplaced in a sentence, an editor can immediately erase the paragraph without first asking for a revision? (vandalism?)
9- Is it usual a steady Wikipedia’s article (constantly improved by numerous users and created many months or years ago) suddenly (in one only day, probably by same person with more than one username) be flooded with impolite demands and amputated like described here?
Thanks Yworo, these are very important and determinant questions to me (and to many others editors, for sure). The affected article in question concerns the subject of ethereal entities (gods, spirits, angels, etc.), now seriously wrecked. Hour of Angels ( talk) 14:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I am User:Iapx86 the youngest son of Jerome Y Lettvin. Jerry just died on March 23rd, and I updated his wikipedia entry. He was far more influential than is currently shown in the article.
I have direct verifiable information that I inserted in this page. However, your edits have been so severe that I hardly trust trying again.
For instance, I had inserted the names of his doctoral_students and influences/influenced in the article. Your action then was to remove the entire list of names and say wikipedia is not a directory. So I reviewed the entry and inserted the names of his doctoral_students in the infobox:scientist. Your criticism was that URLs do not belong in this section. Your action was to remove the entire list of names rather than strip them of their links. If the infobox:scientist doctoral_students section is not the right place for the names of his doctoral students where should such a list be inserted? And if links are not given, how can the information be called verifiable? The dissertations of ALL of these students is now in the archives of the American Philosophical Society. Most of his doctoral students have gone on to substantial careers in the neurosciences.
The material I am inserting is first hand knowledge and verifiable by his students. I am entirely open to criticism and advice on improving my entries. But I am now uncertain that you will not simply remove everything I insert. Please help me improve my delivery to avoid these removals. iapx86 04:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iapx86 ( talk • contribs)
Sorry about both elements. I know better. On the second - the surnames of his wives, I put a placeholder for his wives as a way of reminding myself while working on it, as I expected to be able to find their names. Have not been able to yet, and meant to delete the "xxxs". Parkwells ( talk) 16:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your contribution to one of wikipedia's latest WP:GA's
This user helped promote Sam Fuld to good article status. |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:35, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the error on the first; was trying to distinguish Gorman and Martin, certainly, from the early 20th c. artists; should have indicated later 20th c. Parkwells ( talk) 14:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I have no opinion on this matter and I could not care less, I reverted the IP because a quick search showed that there were obvious links between the two, including links that were admitted by Heinlein himself. I you feel the information is questionable, fine. Asavaa ( talk) 16:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for jumping on board with the expansion, ref documentation, etc. of the colony (one of my most favorite places on Earth). As an FYI, I'm going to be adding references - and there's the non-referenced template that I'll leave up until then - so you need not work that I'll catch them all, I will.-- CaroleHenson ( talk) 17:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Fixed. Please feel free to edit or add a citation needed tag as needed. Thanks, The Fire Tones 14:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok. The Fire Tones 16:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
According to the guideline on lists, they serve three main purposes, of which navigation is but one. The other two are information and development. That is squarely where redlinks fall. If you wish to debate the purpose of lists please take this conversation to the MoS talk page, or propose an AfD for the list to promote other editors' contributions. Thank you. • Freechild talk 00:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
As it happens, I'd added the {{afdanons}} template. Tothwolf removed it, I restored it, and he removed it again. Thanks for putting it back up, but it's time to take this to ANI, I think. ῲ Ravenswing ῴ 03:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (Apologies, but since I mentioned that you put the template back up, I felt it necessary to alert you.) ῲ Ravenswing ῴ 03:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the warning.
Eric567 ( talk) 16:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi. You helped me out a few weeks ago, and I thought you might again. (Actually, I wish I knew of a common wikipedia page where questions like these could be put and answered.)
I sometimes come across articles that look as though they were translated from another language by somebody not quite fluent in English. My current example: Chalcolithic; in fact, I see that the first entry in its history is 15:43, 25 February 2002 Conversion script (talk) m (382 bytes) (Automated conversion)
Do you know if there are accepted ways of marking such articles, something like {{bad english}}? Obviously, one solution is for me to fix it myself, but (a) I don't have time right now, and (b) I'm not sure I can rephrase some of the text without inadvertently changing the meaning. Bloody Viking ( talk) 20:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
User:Yworo has asked the editor using IPs 76.121.180.74 and 24.17.63.79 not to post on this talk page; please have the courtesy to respect this and use the article talk pages instead. Like all users, Yworo has the right to remove any material from this page and will, I assume, continue to do so. Material will be more visible and permanent on article talk pages where it cannot be refactored in this way. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 00:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Thaksinocracy, as per policy an article that has ever been discussed at AfD is ineligible for deletion via prod. I did this only to comply with policy; do not interpret this action as an endorsement for keeping this article. If you still wish to pursue deletion, please open another AfD. — KuyaBriBri Talk 03:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Please see WP:HD#How do I work out what the problem is re Capitalization?. Thanks, Chzz ► 10:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for doing something with that paragraph dealing with Animist faiths in the Spiritualist article. It didn't fit in the article but I was not sure what to do with it. Tom Butler ( talk) 17:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Please don't stuff around with capitalization on CDC CYBER related pages. The correct spelling in this context is all capitals "CYBER" not "Cyber". The CDC CYBER was a mainframe computer manufactured by Control Data Corporation between about 1970 to 1992. The company always used the word CYBER all capitalized. Thanks. Tom. Cdccyber ( talk) 12:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
It was recently suggested that WikiProject New Mexico, to which you are a member, may be inactive or semi-active and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there haven't been much active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. Another user has added the project to the WPUS template and I added it to the list of supported projects in the WPUS main project page but before I take any further action I wanted to contact each of the active members for their input. -- Kumioko ( talk) 15:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
As stated on my talk page, I do have reason to believe sock puppetry is involved with the blocked username in question. Because the majority of this particular drama is taking on Facebook and outside of Wikipedia, I wouldn't expect Wikipedia's admins to have first-hand knowledge of this. The username in question was used to intentionally slander the person whose name it was opened under, "Jessica Darling." I sent a message last week to Wikipedia's admins asking for the IP address of the username, but my request was rebuffed; they feel that the person using the name of "Jessica Darling" should contact them directly instead. -- Modemac ( talk) 18:20, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your help and the barnstar. Much appreciated. - Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 21:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
The subject, or a friend, may add or correct their own birthday, and correct other information that is not controversial, as was done at Michael Walker (knifemaker), see Wikipedia:Autobiography#Problems_in_an_article_about_you. User:Fred Bauder Talk 00:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi
While I appreciate the points you have made, do you know a way to get around the gallery problem of alt= and alt text?
If you can, then having changed them into galleries will be ok, if not then there is still going to be a problem. Chaosdruid ( talk) 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
The links I added on the Chee Soo page are directly relevant to the article, the publisher is non-profit making and what is more they have an extensive online mediawiki with almost all of the author's published works on there to read free of charge. -- Chuangzu ( talk) 19:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Wow, looking at contribs that must have been annoying to clean up. You have to feel for some people. My first articles were deleted and I felt annoyed at Wikipedia, but I soon learnt the notability guideline, not how to troll others. Sorry about the hassle. PS what did it take to get your talk page autoconfirmed? I've been vandalised once or twice during vandal fighting. -- Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 14:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like the newbie at User talk:66.108.86.141 doesn't understand your process. I hope you'll take a moment to enlighten them as to your editing process. Thanks. • Freechild talk 22:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
awesome box at the top of this page, well-reasoned approach to anons. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Are you finished hounding my edits now? You've already been humiliated twice. Please, I encourage you to try a third time. RonaldMerchant ( talk) 01:52, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you were instrumental in helping clean up the entry Tara Brach. I am trying to get the page to comply with Wikipedia's guidelines as much as possible and would love your assistance even though you must be quite busy. I have one question in particular - Tara Brach has been cited in several scholarly journals that can only be accessed on a per-fee basis. If one were to buy the journal article in question citing Tara Brach's work as a psychologist and meditation teacher, could that article be cited even though it's not available to the general public and therefore hard for other editors to review? Thanks in advance for your help. Sueanne0310 ( talk) 22:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
When did I place the template in a section by itself? Reviewing both of my edits ( [1], [2]), the only change to the commons link was to change it to a link to the actual category page. In what was its section location changed? Nightscream ( talk) 09:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
You may care to have a look at the current version of this article, which seems to me to be more promotional than encyclopedic. Thanks,
Derek R Bullamore ( talk) 01:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. I did not know that there was an "inclusion criteria". All I could see on the discussion page was an agreement between 5 users. I personally think that it is pointless creating a list of Buddhist temples with wikipedia articles. There is a different page for that, it is called Category. Also, Lalitpur submetropolitan city website lists the majority of the deleted Buddhist shrines as UNESCO world heritage monuments (within UNESCO world heritage site Kathmandu valley). A reference to the page was also provided during the edit. I see no point excluding UNESCO world heritage monuments just because they do not have an article. Thank you. Cheers!-- Eukesh ( talk) 19:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm looking for people to help maintain outlines. I noticed you did some work on this one awhile back. Would you watchlist this? Please look it over again to help it keep up with Wikipedia's growing coverage of the subject. I look forward to your reply. The Transhumanist 02:40, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
I've added some different outside sources citing information about Lake Superior Zendo. I also added some information about a short-lived scandal involving a Episcopalian Bishop. However, LSZ was only implicated incidentally, and I'm not sure if the information belongs there or in an article about Episcopalian syncretism, or if it only needs to be reworded. There is a huge amount of coverage about the subject (for having happened in the UP of Mich.), but few of the articles name LSZ. Could you suggest where the information belongs, or possibly edit the wording? I'll mention this problem in the discussion page, as well. Thank you. Terrencereilly ( talk) 18:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Sorry I didn't realize right away that the List of Buddhist temples need to have an article written about them. Some other pages, like photographers, work like that, so it is a good idea. Do you think I can include an article made of sanghas in San Diego that people can add to? None of them seem to be notable on their own in my opinion except Deer Park Monastery which already has its own article (except maybe the Dharma Bums because they have three organizations in San Diego). Thanks for your thoughts. - SusanLesch ( talk) 21:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Most of these architects are known by first name. I edited the article List of Bangladeshi architects from practical experience. I wish you think about it again. Rossi101 ( talk) 17:11, 5 November 2011 (UTC) Rossi101
I reverted your edit, but I ask you if you can take a look at the new section on the relevant talk page for your opinion, I also requested mediation from an uninvolved administrator in order to help resolve the issue. Sheodred ( talk) 18:32, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm not a proponent of Wikipedia:UKNAT, btw. GoodDay ( talk) 22:31, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
You are entirely correct. I hadn't really looked at that section for a while. I have now added a sentence with reference to the rebuttal of these theories at "RationalWiki" which in turn cites Prison Planet, etc., so if the user wants to find the promulgators, they can either reference the Cracked.com article or the rationalwiki article.-- WickerGuy ( talk) 22:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I see you've already reverted a few additions by the IP on the Reeves article. Could you possibly review their other edits as they've removed some material as well such as the name of her spouse and are keen on using her first name. I restored the material once already and issued guidance but the IP reverted that and input from another editor would be useful. Thanks.-- Shakehandsman ( talk) 19:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The identification of Judaism as a religion is, as was mentioned in the talk page, a tricky issue. See Who is a Jew? for more information on how a person may be born Jewish, become a practicing Hindu, Muslim, or Catholic, and still be a Jew according to halakh and Israeli law.-- Louiedog ( talk) 19:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, this is to let you know that there is an important discussion taking place in the WP:Astrology project, which affects the guidelines for content and sources on astrology-related pages. This requires input from its members. It would be very much appreciated if you could leave a comment/express your views on the issues raised.
The link to the discussion is here.
Hope you can find time to add a few thoughts
Thank you, -- Zac Δ talk! 14:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Yworo! How does one get the stickers like those on the right-hand side of your page? I notice some people have them, others don't. I've done a lot of minor editing over the last six years but I've just started having my own page here. Axel ( talk) 19:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I've started a section at Richard Reames talk page about the citations need. ?oygul ( talk) 02:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
WP:AN3#User:174.99.127.20 reported by Yworo (talk) (Result: ). There is no good option for admin action that I can see, based on what you have written. The IP-hopping editor can't be easily blocked. We are unlikely to semiprotect an SPI against the person charged. The SPI itself lists a bunch of articles where you think the IP has been misbehaving, including Richard Stallman and C. S. Lewis. If you could make a proper case, it might be justified to semiprotect some of those articles. But some evidence for each article would be needed. If you agree with this approach, consider expanding your 3RR request to justify their protection. EdJohnston ( talk) 16:20, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Do you live in Seattle? I saw that you edit Seattle-area articles.
I would like to invite you to attend a Wikipedia meetup described on Wikipedia:Meetup/seattlewp. This meeting is scheduled for 7pm Tuesday December 6 in Cafe Allegro. Thank you for your attention and I hope to see you there. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it. I found it in the Commons last night by accident. I had no idea it was there when I first wrote the article and was concerned about getting a photo of one of his knives. He onlydoes 2 shows a year and I don't make it to either.-- Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 23:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I have added a couple of references from primary literature, as requested. Perhaps you can help me by tidying up the snytax -- I don't have much experience with citations & Co.
Dulciana ( talk) 21:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
A user called Fred Braches has created a page called Slumach and another page called Pitt Lake gold find. On Fred Braches talk page he states that he has a slumach website. The articles Slumach and Pitt Lake gold find links directly to his website. Fred Braches is using the articles to advertise his website. Is this a conflict of interest. His website is located on the external links section of Slumach and Pitt Lake gold find. It looks like he is advertising a book on his website. Msruzicka ( talk) 21:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Please be less insistent on having things your way.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 02:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could evaluate the new sources that I added to the AfD. SL93 ( talk) 22:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
The book exists. However, the editor who cited the book did so specifically to support the inclusion of "semenancy", which is not mentioned in the book.
To claim that (book X) supports (statement Y), when (book X) makes no mention whatsoever of (statement Y), is to make a false reference. DS ( talk) 19:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Curious what your deal is with the Raymond Salvatore Harmon page I created. I have also noticed a pattern of you removing cited references to him without reason from other wikipages in order to orphan that page. In particular the Stan Brakhage page.
While you complain that I reverted your "work" most of the columns you "fixed" were in fact tables that can be sorted either way chronologically. Additionally you removed a ton of reference links to his work that took me much time in hunting down and adding to this page. While you complain that I reverted your work you have spent a considerable amount of time attacking a page I have been working on for years without consideration.
So, do you have an excuse for your behavior or is it another case of "wikilord will rule the interwebs!"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creatcher ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
You still haven't addressed the issue I am raising which is that you have deliberately looked for and removed as many references to Raymond Salvatore Harmon on wikipedia as you could find. In doing so you seem to be showing a kind of behavior that is unbecoming to someone who truly wants to improve the wiki community. Having now spent a bit of time looking through your editing history and past interactions with other editors and contributors to wikipedia I am concerned about a focused attempt that you are making toward changing articles related to esoterism, occultism, and specific filmmakers and artists who interact with those fields.
From other discussions and issues I have seen here on wikipedia (related to your user name) it would appear your actions are deliberate and meant not to make wikipedia a better place but to reinforce certain concepts, downplay certain people involved in these fields, and overall change historic fact for personal research on a large scale.
I would like you to address this question. Are you changing articles to reflect an altered version of what is referenced data in order to downplay certain people, and or change how wikipedia represents historic fact involving these fields? It certainly would appear so. Creatcher ( talk) 23:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo - I have just noticed that you changed the article titles to be enclosed by double quotes not single quotes. I want to explain the situaion so you don't mind that I change them back. Unaware that you had done this, but with other quote issues in mind, I raised a question yesterday morning about the use of the quotes in the article, was subsequently informed that its OK to follow the format of using single quotes for article titles, and then I posted some typographical conventions to keep a note of what is being consistently applied in the article. See also this post which came over the discussion on the FA discussion page, saying the single quotes should be retained.
It is only this morning that I notice you changed the quotes in the citation box yesterday. I think the footnotes and citations should be consistent with each other, and it will be an easy job to change the quotes in the Works cited panel, but a hell of a job picking through all the code to change the style in the inline citations. The reason I want to explain this is so you don't think I am thoughtlessly reverting your edit. So hope that's OK. And thanks for adding the sister project links - I was struggling with that -- Zac Δ talk! 10:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate the work you've done, your edits on different articles keep coming up on my watchlist (and my watchlist isn't too big) — but right now I'm going to have to ask you to slow down a bit, you're putting a lot of work on me. I don't know of anyone else who's ready to immediately do the actual research on these subjects, and I'd prefer to concentrate on one or two subjects at a time without the pressure. Maybe refrain from AfD'ing on this topic for the next week or so? Please? — Jeraphine Gryphon ( talk) 16:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what an imprint is. — Jeraphine Gryphon ( talk) 07:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Has been deleted. you can go ahead with your move. -- GraemeL (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate your input on all the pix at Lady Lilith. You may be right in removing some of them. I'll ask that you describe the issues on the talkpage. I may revisit the illustrations. My basic feeling is that this is an article about an illustration, how it developed, and was then displayed, so that lots of illustrations are required. But I'll wait awhile to let my mind clear first. Smallbones ( talk) 02:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi.
I'm not sure if you saw, but I got an answer to your question, via the helpdesk and the Village Pump;
.page-Special_Watchlist .mw-rollback-link {display:none}
Hope that helps. Chzz ► 12:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yworo. I think we have agreed and disagreed but your contributions have greatly benefited the project and respect to you for that. I hope you won't allow this issue to upset you longer than necessary and that you will return to contributing in the near future. Best wishes and happy holidays. Youreallycan ( talk) 18:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Well done dude - don't let it get to you. Ignore them, rise above it, don't reply in kind. Youreallycan ( talk) 23:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
I've closed the ANI thread. If it happens again, don't be drawn into an argument: ping an admin directly with the evidence. I'm not sure whether there's a long-term solution, but assuming said IP isn't so obsessed that he starts rapidly swapping IPs a block or two should encourage him to find something more productive to do with his time than following you around. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of StarWind Software. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Hu12 ( talk) 16:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
For converting my bunch of amazon.com book URLs to ISBN / text view during the work on the article marked AfD. That's pure altruism and and excellent example of a team work. Thank you for your efforts! APS (Full Auto) ( talk) 23:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks for weighing in at this discussion. I made a serious proposal to Yakushima; I'm naive enough to think it has a chance. If we get to the next level, one of the conditions I'll ask for is participation in a community discussion about footnotes in infoboxes. I think it is clear they should be avoided, but I'd like to see a robust community discussion about when exceptions are warranted. I'd also like to see a discussion about what qualifies as an influence. I'll go along with what the community wants, but I think the inclusion criteria should be a little tighter than "I found a ref that says the views of X were somehow affected by the views of Y". I think the threshold should be stronger than that.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 13:54, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
On a different subject, I just read your rationale for semi protection of this page. Very interesting. I'm not quite ready to adopt it myself, maybe I've been lucky and haven't had much interaction with IPs, but it poses a concept (communication power imbalance), I hadn't considered before.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 16:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
looking like this use is not here to contribute content - it's primary function appears to attaching you - one of the sadder parts of anyone can edit, our open environment. Youreallycan ( talk) 18:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi all. I saw the report on WP:AIV and have been thinking about what to do while I was at the gym. The account User:Irolnire has not edited an article since September and has stated that they have no intention of editing an article again. So their sole purpose here seems to be to harass Yworo. I am gonna indef-block on that basis. I have these IPs so far and will range-block if the harassment continues: I record them here for future reference:
Please continue to collect any further IPs used as the more info we have, the tighter the range blocks, and the less collateral damage. Please post on my talk page if/when the user reappears; or send a note to Drmies; he is almost always around. Regards, -- Dianna ( talk) 04:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Hey, it's always great to collaborate with a fellow veteran editor who can throw in a good cite! -- Tenebrae ( talk) 03:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Check out the external links on Bob Timberlake (artist). One of the links is a furniture store and the other link is advertising merchandise for sale. Bob Timberlake official website is advertising merchandise for sale including lamps etc... Msruzicka ( talk) 07:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I was working on an article called Albert Ostman. Some have questioned it's notability. Is the article notable, what is your opinion? Msruzicka ( talk) 08:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick word of thanks for your small-but-helpful fixes to [[Peter Nygård]]. It is hard to catch such things without a lot more experience...
Alexthepuffin ( talk) 14:52, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Demi Moore and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, Tenebrae ( talk) 15:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
I've started a discussion on the IP at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed community ban for a harrassing IP. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
The statement at the beginning did indeed say "currently." Please look it up. I'm not talking about anything but use of the word "currently" in violation of WP:DATED. If you want to repeat the same words about citizenship twice in one paragraph, by all means, go ahead. I'm removing your uncivil post from my talk page.-- Tenebrae ( talk) 01:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
...just want to say that it's nice to see us, twice now, in agreement (re: Charlize above and Grant Morrison). Emotions aside, I know we have in common that we care for this wonderful, altruistic project, WIkipedia, very much, and we're making the concrete contribution of our time and effort. So maybe we'll be able to find common ground sometime. In the meantime, I would like to wish you happy holidays. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Could you check out the article Cadborosaurus willsi. Information was added which was not cited and some information was cited to Youtube videos. Can youtube videos be used as a references? Msruzicka ( talk) 06:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Somebody has cited a video as a reference in the Cadborosaurus willsi article again. Although the video does not appear to be from youtube. Msruzicka ( talk) 08:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Is the article North Carolina Barbecue Society notable? Msruzicka ( talk) 05:55, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I've had to modify your userbox per Wikipedia:Userpages#Images, which doesn't allow sexually provocative images. I have replaced it with another that should carry the same meaning. Sorry. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 17:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Malleus Fatuorum was unblocked by a fellow Arbitration clerk in order to participate in the request for arbitration. Malleus himself requested twice to be reblocked, which was granted, and has since made it perfectly clear that he does not wish to be unblocked. Your userbox, to my mind, serves no purpose other than to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. -- Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 18:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Don't panic. :) There's a discussion there about someone's alleged "attack page". Your documentation page, User:Yworo/IP incident record, strikes me as a model for the right way to build up a case. I have to say that I have not yet looked at the details of the complaint, but once I do, I would like to cite your page. If that's OK with you. :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the article Homeland Stupidity under G10 instead of G3, since it was clearly a page meant to attack Homeland Security. Keep in mind that it's better to tag attack pages under G10, because they're prioritized for speedy deletion and blanked.-- Slon02 ( talk) 04:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
I understand the policy. The dispute here is about terms. I feel your deletion of the polyfidelitous section was retaliation against me for adding back two names you removed. Polyamory is a wider term - you could have at least copied the polyfideltious section into the main list instead of totally deleting it. I am feeling physically sick right now because of your targeted actions towards me. Cooltobekind ( talk) 03:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I never falsified any references you bully!!! I took my time and researched they were in relationships with multiple people. You say one thing for living, and are now holding the dead to the same standard - when the authors of these academic texts clearly state they were in consenting relationships with multiple people Cooltobekind ( talk) 06:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I've requested a dispute resolution team to clarify the issues. 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 " List of polyamorists". Thank you.
thank you for your contribution! however i had the excess space there because the expand button interfere with the TOC. Abc123456person ( talk) 22:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
i will remove the links. however this will take a long time as i need to keep them as references for replacement internal links. Abc123456person ( talk) 19:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
you have been invited to find the elusive camocat! he is hiding on my user page. Abc123456person ( talk) 19:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you have re-instated the split tag. I think it was removed because there was a marginal concensus not to split (see the talk page). I am only interested, because I have been trying to clear up the backlog of split tags and now this one has suddenly re-appeared. If you have a clear idea of how to split the article then I suggest that you do so, the split tag is already over a year and a half old. Op47 ( talk) 19:10, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to canvas you again. Is the article The Group 1965 notable? Msruzicka ( talk) 02:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)