![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
-- sent you that study discussed at the Yanardag article. Look over pp 522-523 and then we can proceed. Montanabw (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
There were 3 editors who all agreed the lists are redundant. The NYTimes timeline is redundancy - we don't need a photo of the NYTimes building. The other timeline is already in the prose. There was no justification to your reverting information that is purely redundant. Your actions are disruptive. Atsme 📞 📧 11:54, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (
talk)
00:57, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at Kudpung's talk page.
07:35, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Since I don't want to bother you any longer, I'd want to fix the talk page issues I had. So I was replying to the other user and not to you, that is why I put the same amount of colons as you (an additional one to what you are replying to). So, can you help me with this?-- ZiaLater ( talk) 05:04, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Since you have been so involved with the article, I thought you'd be interested in this.-- ZiaLater ( talk) 10:56, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
I made a case on WP:COIN and WP:RFP. Also, some of E-DemSnoopy's edits could be reverted since they aren't really notable and are just filler in the article to promote Smartmatic. However, this is difficult for me since it somewhat balances the POV in the article. We can worry about this later since I am more concerned about further POV/COI edits. It seems that without protection, the article will have continuous accounts coming from nowhere.-- ZiaLater ( talk) 21:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at Kudpung's talk page.
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (
talk)
05:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
YGM. If the link didn't work, let me know. I've cleaned up the list. To get the red links you'll have to go through the list and put square brackets round the page names and save the list again. If you want anything else, let me know and I'll mail it to you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 08:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
The event is in the article. If you can't see it, let me know and I'll show the words. Please stop making such pointy edits. The Rambling Man ( talk) 20:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
jps (
talk)
11:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Casting_aspersions Atsme 📞 📧 02:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in there. Hillbillyholiday has ceased the mass deletions and edit warring, but, like I stated at WP:ANI, I'm certain that the disruption will start back up again. Hillbillyholiday is just biding his time, waiting for the matter to cool down, and will be right back at it afterward. I'm not sure that I want to be the one to start a WP:ANI thread on this editor in the future, especially when there are administrators not paying attention to the case or giving it the serious attention it deserves. You are at WP:ANI a lot more than I am, and administrators might be more willing to listen to you if you start a thread on the editor in the future. In the past, administrators would be more concerned about any WP:ANI thread I started, but it's a different story these days (for whatever reason). Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 19:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
And, yeah, I know that the weekends (especially Sundays) are slow on Wikipedia, but still. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 19:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Just saw your ping today re the sockpuppet investigation for Caesar's ghost. I was on holiday (in the Basque country, ironically enough) so now I'm back I'll keep an eye on those articles. Valenciano ( talk) 11:30, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Could you please join the discussion at /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Appeal_of_community_sanctions_placed_on_User:Barts1a Twitbook space tube 12:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender. I don't think that the non-free File:1938-xmas-tiny-tim.jpg is needed any longer per WP:NFCC#1 because there are some feely licensed images of the actor available in c:Category:Terry Kilburn which could be used instead for identification purposes; so, I have tagged the file with {{ rfu}}. The Commons' files appear to have been uploaded a few years after you uploaded the non-free one to Wikipedia, and unless you feel they should be deleted from Commons for some reason or the non-free one can somehow be converted to public domain for some reason, one of them should be used instead. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
If you don't want the sentences removed, please tell us why in the talk page. Currently, no one has objected. Thanks.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 00:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback. Use rollback on an article talk page on anything but vandalism is wildly inappropriate. Please be more mindful of your privileges going forward. — nihlus kryik ( talk) 13:12, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
ridiculous procedural grounds like this is a courtroom or something. TimothyJosephWood 14:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Given the text of the remedy here, I don't think I agree with your statement here. However, I'd like to hear your thinking on it. As far as I can see, as soon as the editor makes a complaint on a noticeboard, that noticeboard becomes a "page reasonably construed as being related to the Arab-Israeli conflict," and I think the text of the first exception at least implies that noticeboard discussions are intended to be included in the prohibition. But I'll agree that the wording could be a lot clearer on this. Unless I'm missing something, I may well end up asking the question at ARCA. A penny for your thoughts? GoldenRing ( talk) 21:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Dear Softlavender,
I am very concerned about some of your edits on the Peter Levy page, in which you have removed a lot of information. Whilst I can understand you removing some uncited points, you have removed at least two points that have been correctly cited.
Also, please can you explain your reasons for removing the Radio Humberside section, and I note that you have suggested that this was as the 'entire section was WP:OR and WP:SYNTH'. Please can you clarify under what point does the section fall under WP:OR/SYNTH.
Thank you.
-- Zoyetu ( talk) 20:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Only warning. If you continue to make WP:ASPERSIONS about me in any setting such as you did on WP:AN and WP:ANI, I will seek to have you sanctioned. — nihlus kryik ( talk) 15:09, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 13 September 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Mkdw talk 05:21, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
FYI The IP hopper content removed. Previously archived by an IP in March 2017. Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 22:33, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Seem to have been more editing from Kerala on Social work: here Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 04:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender, can you state the policy you were applying in this edit please. -- de Facto ( talk). 08:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I updated the article and included in it both Android and iOS apps. Please review it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by SipleDailyUser ( talk • contribs) 08:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Re this, what's the alternative? Are you suggesting that we stop copying his comments? Do we recognize any right to a self-defense? If so, where is the line? ― Mandruss ☎ 04:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsure why you removed the edit "In September 2017, outside an airport in Los Angeles, Bourdain threatened to poison U.S. President Donald Trump if given the chance ref https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwxBVX7HZtU /ref" Given that this is a factual statement, an event which occurred on video, and certainly adds to the section in which is was placed, discussing Bourdain's public persona. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glialsupporter ( talk • contribs) 11:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender, thank you for your comments at my RfA. I hope that I'll be able to answer your concerns with my actions rather than my words. Cheers, ansh 666 23:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks.
Other than the fact that there were some active FFD/CSD's I'd have asked you to monitor User:ShakespeareFan00 closely.
And thanks for letting the other party know about the AN thread. I perhaps should have left that notification myself? Time to take an extended wiki-break, to allow tempers to cool down. ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 09:14, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello Softlavender. Per the articleinfo results the person you are obliquely referring to must be User:A.S. Brown. In your posting to User:Drmies could you clarify if that is the case? Also, one would normally expect some discussion on the article talk about this. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 14:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Winged Blades of Godric On leave 11:35, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Family guy#Participant survey, about resolving questions not resolved in the earlier RfC. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 17:48, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
I see you've been working on Wiki for ten years. You should therefore know that no one can edit an article which bears the template "in use" which you nonetheless did which resulted in the loss of 5 references and 5 external links that I had added. Wiki being a collaborative encyclopedy, feel free to repair you error. Thanks; LouisAlain ( talk) 10:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
I was looking at your recent postings to ANI and though how sensible, those look like someone with experience around here. I then noticed on you home page that you have been editing for more than 10 years which confirmed my suspicion. So I ran interaction tool, and that is why I did not recognise the user name. It seems that the only time where we have previously posted to the same section in less than a day was an RfC on Talk:Simon Collins (I was only there to fire fight.) So not surprising that I did not recognise the user name. Keep up the good work. -- PBS ( talk) 20:48, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I am reaching out to you about a recent dispute you were involved in regarding the Smartmatic article. From my understanding, you commented on the case after user ZiaLater reported users Carriedevalle23 and E-Dem snoopy for a possible conflict of interest. I am writing an in-depth article about the management of Wikipedia and I am trying to learn more about situations like yours. Would you be willing to talk to me more about this situation? -- Investigativereporter ( talk) 14:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Still haven't found a 60s screening date in the US but I have two more sources that establish it was filmed in 1967. The first is an article from the Sydney Morning Herald for 14 Jan 1968 about designer Lex Aitkin stating "Recently he has completed two houses for Susannah York as well as the sets for her new American film, A Month in the Country." The second is an article about Susannah York from the Detroit American 9 July 1968 stating she "appeared in the lead opposite her husband, English actor Michael Wells, in a screen version of the successful London theatre show "A Month in the Country," directed by Wells." There's another article about Susannah from the Chicago Tribune-Sun for 16 August 1970 talking about the staging of the play by York and Wells in 1967 but it doesn't say anything making a film of it which implies it hadn't been screened by 1970.
The earliest screening I can find is July 1978 on CBC Channel 9 in July 1978 where it was seen in both Canada and the northern US. If you want pdf's of all these I can email them to you.
A factor about the film that might be relevant is that is was the first colour TV film made for the American market - this is cited in the obituary of designer Alan Pickford in The Times 21 March 2003 - so it could be that the American TV companies decided not to screen the show until the use of colour TVs was more widespread? Nthep ( talk) 17:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Nthep ( talk) 13:56, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
PS: It's weird per your provided newspaper page that it aired in Michigan in July 1978 (same as in Canada) on the local CBS affiliate, but no evidence to your knowledge that it aired elsewhere in the U.S. on that date? Softlavender ( talk) 00:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Zoyetu and August 2017 BLP Topic Ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
I removed a duplicated comment - you clearly did not make the exact comment twice in the same thread with the same time stamp. I'm also not an involved editor in anyway at all so your revert of my close was mistitled. Legacypac ( talk) 04:41, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
The previous people involved in the discussion of Template talk:Marriage are being contacted to help gain consensus. -- RAN ( talk) 23:46, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
That's why you are removed my content about Anthony Bourdain? Do you think I'm lie ? Please try read about this information Ministry of Foreign affairs of Azerbaijan Republic. HajisoyE ( talk) 08:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC) https://www.cntraveler.com/story/anthony-bourdain-has-been-blacklisted-by-azerbaijan-after-visiting-disputed-territory
With respect to your comment on my talk page, I found it rather rude, and I think you don't need to police Wikipedia in such a way. Everything I have added in my edits is true and verifiable, and fully relevant to and noteworthy for the subject of the encycolpedia pages. There is nothing wrong with saying certain literary works exist, when they do, and there is evidence to show that they do. There is no self-promotion in the text of my edits, any more than there is in any of the other listings of such works as I list. Bubbly1558 ( talk) 00:21, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You wrote We don't use group images for infoboxes - can you point to where that is a policy or guideline? Thanks. -- GRuban ( talk) 22:59, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
All right, I admit it; the cropped photos actually look better in the two articles I put the whole one in. Here, I see you're working on Indigo children? Maybe this will help. It's not very good resolution, but, it's a free image. -- GRuban ( talk) 00:42, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
A flower, then? Feel free to remove this too if it bothers you. I just want to say thanks for helping, despite my best efforts to resist. -- GRuban ( talk) 01:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing my edit to Beethoven. While "irascible" may be a common adjective for you, it is not common for me. I had to look up the definition. I did know what deafness and bipolar disorder mean, yet links have been provided for readers who do not know their meanings. I suggest either replacing the word "irascible" with a more common word such as "ill-tempered," or "cranky," or add a phrase clarifying the meaning. I will watch this spot for other suggestions you may have for improving the article. Thanks again for reviewing my edit. Comfr ( talk) 17:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
That material had been challenged. I missed the earlier explanation by the original editor on the talk page, but there is still no consensus to include it. I don't see anything particularly useful in describing how chocolate is made and as far as I see there is nothing special about the description that is particular to this chocolate bar, so I agree that it should not be included in the article. Meters ( talk) 01:36, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
You are edit warring at Pardon of Joe Arpaio and restoring a challenged BLP violation that was removed twice, claiming in your edit summary that the article is not a BLP. Please stop edit warring. You have been an editor long enough to know BLP policy, and have been asked to discuss making changes beforehand on the TP. You also need to revisit the source you cited because it is one person's "perspective" on Arpaio, it is not about the pardon; therefore, a questionable source. You have not attempted to discuss anything and chose to edit war instead. You are not even trying to collaborate in a collegial manner with others. I have taken the BLP vio concerns to BLPN. Atsme 📞 📧 13:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
I put my additional comments under my original request for a good reason: because it needs to be read by those reading the request and not lost in the comments below. I'd appreciate it if you move it back right away. Truth be told, you should have asked first and/or notified me since they are my comments (and I was clear in why I placed them where I did in the comments themselves). Thanks for your cooperation. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Why are you not an admin? GMG talk 01:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Hey Softlavender, hope you're well. As I'm sure you saw, Datari Turner's page got deleted, but I appreciate you stepping in with your comments about WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, WP:NOIMPROVEMENT and WP:GNG. I am going to review a few of the guidelines with my client, and should we decide to re-submit to AfC, I wanted to see if you'd be courteous enough to volunteer your time to quickly review our draft to see if you think it passes guidelines for notability / neutral language? Would be much appreciated. Let me know. Thanks! JacobMW ( talk) 16:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Megalibrarygirl: (pinging you since you also did some work on the article) Hey there, I saw you took an interest in editing Ruth Jones article. I have additional drafts at AfC, Deborah Gebhardt, Joey Vrazel, and Marsha Reall, if you are interested in improving them. I believe I have enough citations for notability, but if you think I need more, I can scrape newspapers.com or other sources for additional sources. Thanks for your work on the Purdue athletics articles, and if you do not want to or have time to edit these, no worries! Kees08 (Talk) 20:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 ( talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
It's not because I particularly want a reply, or further conversation, but for curiosity and my archives: did you receive my e-mail, which I sent via the "e-mail this user" function yesterday? Bishonen | talk 17:32, 2 December 2017 (UTC).
Hello, Softlavender. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
You are being notified because you participated in a previous AN/I report about this editor. Another report has been filed here. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 05:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
I see you redirected the article,but how long does that take? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daquan7474 ( talk • contribs) 06:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
you wrote this- Redirect to Nuestra Belleza El Salvador#Representatives in Big Four pageants, per NewYorkActuary, and full protect the Redirect. We've got a massive sock/meat farm constantly trying to pump up or recreate the entry (as evidenced even by the participation in this AfD), so we need protection against that. Softlavender (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
so I am confused,what are you doing with the article? keep or redirect?
the discussion is closed on the administrator noticeboard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daquan7474 ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I have not editited the Julia Mora article anymore. But I have been watching you. Its obvious this article is going tp either be redirected or deleted. why is that still ongoing? do you ever sleep softlavender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daquan7474 ( talk • contribs) 10:26, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Julia Mora. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Lacypaperclip ( talk) 08:55, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Please don't reply to other people's messages. It is rude. Thanks. And please don't talk to me again. Thanks. Mister Sneeze A Lot ( talk) 12:19, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits, such as those to
Bazooka (instrument), appear to be
intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally
unpopular way, are highly
disruptive and can lead to a
block or
ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through
dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you. There is no question, no question whatever that the use of the image at issue violated NFCC#1. It is obviously replaceable. Per its rationale, its only purpose is simple illustration. The only way use of a nonfree image for this purpose could be justified would be if no bazookas existed at all, like it was an extinct species. This is an extraordinarily simple point, aand any reasonable, competent editor should be able to grasp it. Moreover, at the time BMK added the nonfree image to the relevant article, the article actually included an external link to a source of free images for the article! Your dislike of rigorous NFCC enforcement does not entitle you to blithely restore obvious violations to Wikipedia articles. That is, in fact, blockable editing.
The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (
talk)
06:28, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
If there is a PD image, it has to be used and the non-free image has to be deleted. Please don't continue restoring it. We hope ( talk) 13:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Yes of course I understand the difference between deletion and redirection. Don't try to patronise me – I'm far too long in tooth for that. I couldn't care less what the effect of deletion or redirection has for editors, admins or oversighters; I'm simply interested in what the effect is for our readers, and I'm astonished that you don't appear to grasp that both redirection and deletion removes the content from the sight of 99.9% of the visitors to the page. Readers don't go ferreting through the page history of a redirect to find content that's been hidden from them, even though in theory they could. I have to say I'm extremely disappointed in how you've interacted with Atsme. Either you've forgotten that redirection removes the content from the view of our readership (and therefore really does have the same effect as deletion) or you're aware of that and you're playing semantic games with her. In whichever case, it's very unbecoming conduct. -- RexxS ( talk) 16:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
You participated in Template talk:Marriage last time about end=died and end=divorced, now there is a question about including the year that a marriage ends for completeness, or leaving it off for brevity. -- RAN ( talk) 22:28, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Why did you revert the edits by 91.49.71.240? I checked the edits, and the entire chart was indeed supported by a circular reference. Boomer Vial Happy Holidays! • Contribs 01:33, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Why have you rolled back my edit to Age of consent? I get that it may look odd by an IP but that table is entirely unsourced, or rather sourced to other wikipedia articles(which from my understanding is the same). At least a note why you rolled it back would be appreciated. I can only learn if i know what i did wrong. 91.49.71.240 ( talk) 01:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Boomer Vial and 91.49.71.240: Please see the article's talk page. Please also keep content discussions on article talk rather than usertalk. Softlavender ( talk) 01:46, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi, with
this edit you posted a comment that contained this segment; "...anyone who does not have that admin-wannabe userbox)
". You appear to be using the term "wanna-be" pejoratively, and since literally thousands of editors have one of several variations of the "I'm not an admin, but might like to be one someday" userbox on their userpage, you have basically insulted all of them. My question is, that wasn't your intention, was it? -
theWOLFchild
06:42, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
I've caused this year to end on a chord of disappointment for many, but I hope that despite my mistakes and the differences in opinion and perspectives, and regardless of what the outcome is or in what capacity I can still contribute in the coming year, we can continue working together directly or indirectly on this encyclopedic project, whose ideals are surely carried by both of our hearts. I'm hoping I have not fallen in your esteem to the level where "no hard feelings" can no longer ring true, because I highly respect you and your dedication to Wikipedia, and I sincerely wish you and your loved ones all the best for 2018.
|
It's that time of the year, SoftL. No fancy template, but just wishing you all the best for the holidays and the new year. It's probably a lot warmer where I am than where you are 😎 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 04:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Happy holidays, Softlavender. Wishing you well, looking forward to learning more from you. Sending greetings from Kyoto, Japan. Alex Shih ( talk) 08:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello Softlavender: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 16:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
So I've come upon another interesting predicament. I've noticed two users, both particularly interested in Costa Rica and Buddhism (pretty unique), making a series of consecutive edits. I saw this and it raised some questions. However, I also saw this investigation which made things even more confusing. I'm asking your oversight since you have more experiences with potential socks. An explanation of this relationship would be helpful as well.
Happy Holidays! -- ZiaLater ( talk) 23:24, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
The article Richard Zobel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Lacks notability fails WP:ENT since he only has had minor roles
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Rusf10 (
talk)
01:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
May you have very Happy Holidays, Softlavender ...
and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!
Best wishes,
Voceditenore (
talk)
07:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:IanCharleson.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:For Ian Charleson A Tribute cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Merry Christmas Softlavender!!
Hi Softlavender, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia!
,
–
Davey2010
Merry Xmas / Happy New Year
13:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holidays |
From Stave one of Dickens
A Christmas Carol
So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD| Talk 02:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC) |
Your recent editing history at ETA (separatist group) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 16:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Compliments of the season Wishing you all the best for 2018 — good health, sufficient wealth, peace and contentment | |
Cheers! ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 18:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading File:For Ian Charleson A Tribute cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:10, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Softlavender,
The sources listed are coming from Allmusic.com and have since been removed from their website. If you look at Billboard.com itself, it will become evident that the soundtrack album did not return to #1 and hasn't since the 1960's. Check both the Billboard #1 albums of 2010 and 2013 and that title does not appear on any week, with Billboard.com as a source backing that up. Additionally, Allmusic was known to copy and paste numbers on any album reentry instead of presenting a newer reentry peak.
Please evaluate that decision.
~~WolfSpear Orion XXV ( talk) 06:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thank you for reaching out to me. I apologize for.the miscommunication. I haven't communicated with other users yet so it's still a bit confusing to me learning to navigate on here. I trimmed the Ali/Clay paragraph on the Malcolm X page and posted. I also corrected the Blood Brothers book citation. I appreciate the feedback. Twixister ( talk) 10:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Happy Holiday Barnstar | |
How about combining a Barnstar with a Christmas Card? That is why this message is appearing on your talk page. Simultaneously and at the same time, this barnstar is conferred upon you because during this past year you worked and contributed your time to improve the encyclopedia. You also have received far too little recognition for your contributions. In addition, this is a small attempt at spreading holiday cheer. I've appreciated your work. The Best of Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ and Merry Christmas 01:01, 17 December 2017 (UTC) |
![]() |
Happy New Year! Best wishes for 2018, — Paleo Neonate – 13:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC) |
Martinevans123
(Santa's Drop-in Centre) ... sends you ...
... warmest seasonal wishes for ......
Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.
Oi,
"Softie"... Hoping that Christmas may bless you with
peace, love and understanding... and wishing that you have a good
run in 2018!!
Softlavender,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
-- ψλ ●
✉
✓
23:30, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Dropping by to wish you a SAFE & HAPPY New Year celebration, Softlavender. Stay warm wherever you are and be safe - watch the other guy!! HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! Atsme 📞 📧 23:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I've been meaning to ask for some time; is your username a joke of some sort? I ask because it often reminds me of a less crude version of an old handle I used to use on BBS systems, "MuleCrevice", which I chose because substituting both words with synonyms yields "JackassCrack". (Admittedly, I was about 15 when I thought it up). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Comments like that make me question if there's any point to fixing my errors at all. I only wish to improve, not be treated as someone who can't be trusted to enforce what the community wants. I assure you, I don't get anything out of being skewered at those boards... especially when there are a few dozen editors that show up on every error I make to correct me. It only takes one administrator to make me change my actions usually these days, unless dealing with Arbitration Enforcement. That area is an entirely different animal I've been trying to tame for years, and it's one in which many editors/admins like to throw shame on admins who enforce no matter if they're just doing what the policies state. This isn't easy, and I don't expect it to be. But, I don't want to be forced to also abandon enforcing in the AP topic area, just to not come under constant scrutiny as if I'm getting kicks off of blocking people. Was it fun to use the button against vandals and whatnot when I first got it 10 years ago? Sure... but that "oh this is neat" feeling went away a long, long time ago (within the first 6 months of having the responsibility). I'm still a sysop here today because I don't believe in giving up on the idea of the world not being misinformed... regardless of whether I've given up on myself. And the reason I performed so many scrutinized actions upon my recent return is because I simply lost a lot of ground when I had to be away in attempting to ensure the topic area was being properly patrolled. It isn't because I've fallen off my rocker... although that could be said of why I left. - I have no idea if posting on your talk page will have any impact on your understanding of my motivations/actions/character, but I felt the need to at least say something if you think I've really become a bad apple in the bunch. I've got to get offline however. I have a flight to catch in 4 hours... and I've not gotten any sleep now. (Just have to post one more thing to a thread at AN.) — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 16:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
If you find time for it could you take a look at my recent noms at TAFI Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Nominations. Would appreciate no matter what !vote as no one is attending the TAFI nom page anymore to give input. Regards,-- BabbaQ ( talk) 19:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Well...the problem is that there is no requisite category Category:20th-century women singers right now. I'd be happy to create one and move those other articles into it, but right now it feels like those are the only two options we've got. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 05:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:People of the Earth Hopman.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi. What do you think about your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Nassar and the existence of Bruce McArthur? Best wishes, my friend. :) Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 13:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
The leek is one of the national emblems of Wales, worn along with the daffodil (in Welsh, the daffodil is known as "Peter's leek", Cenhinen Bedr) on St. David's Day. According to one legend, King Cadwaladr of Gwynedd ordered his soldiers to identify themselves by wearing the vegetable on their helmets in an ancient battle against the Saxons that took place in a leek field. [1] Cheers!‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 15:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
References
Joining the music, in a supporting role. (She created a Strauss role, of a servant.) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
There is an RfC at Talk:Daily Mail#Request for comment: Other criticisms section. Your input would be most helpful. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 12:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a bit confused about The World Only Spins Forward: The Ascent of Angels in America being a content fork? I created the article because I had seen/heard quite a lot of coverage about it both before and after its release, in the Washington Post, NYT, on NPR, and in quite a few smaller outlets, but then found no article. However, I've never done much substantive editing on book articles, so I checked the WP:NBOOKS page before creating it, and found that it at least met the WP:GNG. I'm not sure why it would qualify as a content fork? I mean, certainly the book itself could be used as a source to help add to the content in Angels in America, but it's an oral history about not only the play itself but also the context and impact of the play in a more broad sense, and includes content about LGBT history, the AIDS epidemic, politics, etc. on a more broad level, so it's more than just a straight recounting of the production history. Certainly right now it's just a stub (I was planning on expanding once I'd gotten a copy of the book and had time to go through all the coverage on it) but as far as I can tell, WP:REDUNDANTFORK and WP:POVFORK are the only unacceptable forks, so I'm not sure which one of those it falls under? Also, don't you typically merge forks, not delete them? Anyway, sorry for rambling, I'm a bit lost here, so I just wanted to understand a bit better about why you felt it should be deleted. Thank you! ElfLady64 ( talk) 06:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. Zigzig20s ( talk) 03:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
"So whatever you are trying to say, the OED is saying that the English phrase "useful idiot" does not seem to correspond"
: I just said above that I did not feel "reflect" was a direct synonym for "correspond to" or even "mirror". And "trying to say" is rude when it should've been quite clear. Like I am spouting gibberish? Just like the OED may be wrong about etymology, English majors may be wrong about English. To embody, represent or reflect something requires that that something existed beforehand. Also consider what "
reflect" means in physics in the sense of a mirror reflecting light. The light comes from a source, hits the mirror, and bounces off. And no this doesn't mean "mirror" is used to mean the same thing as reflect, I think it is used to mean more like "correspond to". Things can mirror each other at the same time, based on how we use the term. Mirror or correspond can be used to imply parallel existence but reflection implies prior existence.
—DIYeditor (
talk)
05:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Dear Softlavender, Francis Schonken does not seem to be respecting consensus at the moment. [3] That happened on a DYK hook created by Gerda, who has been helping me at her suggestion for two weeks or so (she asked me on her user talk page and I was happy to help her). Similarly consensus is not being respected in the accompanying article and the ongoing discussion, which involves reading a nuanced, carefully-written and lengthy chapter written in 2017. What is your advice? As encouraged by Gerda, I have contributed quite a lot to the main article and that is still happening. At the moment I want to write a brief paragraph about the Reformation in Strasbourg. It is easy to find reliable secondary sources. Thanks, Mathsci ( talk) 08:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Please don't invite other editors to edit war, like you did here. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 10:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Well from your comment it is clear that you may not know much about Manuel de Falla, and even less about his music. If you cared to even read the article on Wikipedia about him, you can read this: "There he met a number of composers who had an influence on his style, including the impressionists Maurice Ravel, Claude Debussy and Paul Dukas". He is also mentioned in the article "Musical impressionism". If you want concrete examples his work Nights in the Gardens of Spain is described as "impressionistic". Also I understand that you might not know about the history of Spanish classical music, but Falla, like virtually every Spanish composer of the late 19th century and beginning of 20th century, completed his musical education in Paris, and was influenced by French music (other examples are Isaac Albéniz, Enrique Granados and Joaquín Rodrigo). What I thought would be discussed about my edit was whether Falla was relevant enough to be included on the list or not. I did not expect someone making a fool out of himself arguing about an obvious fact, that Falla was influenced by Debussy. I mean, I try not to opinate and argue about something I know nothing about, and I expected everyone to do the same. That's why your comment is surprising for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.236.52 ( talk) 12:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Please, see WP:CON and WP:WAR. We can discuss any troubles and doubts about my/ your/ someone's else edits before such reverts: [6], [7], [8], [9]-- Tamtam90 ( talk) 22:47, 10 April 2018 (UTC).
Greetings!
I took a look at instances where Hullaballoo Wolfowitz's editing conduct has been discussed at ANI. You made a number of comments last December, in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive972#Edit warring to restore NFCC violation and unsourced claims
I found this edit of yours particularly interesting.
Thanks! Geo Swan ( talk) 02:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
The patience it takes to monitor the bimonthly thread where the next attempt (by the same players every month) to change Kiev to "Kyiv" will occur shortly! Thank you for your patience and persistence. -- Taivo ( talk) 03:35, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
mY Apologies for taking the liberty to write on your page, but I felt I must offer an explanation to your riposte.
I am aged 52, and have been writing this Wikipedian for over 15 years. Secondly, I wish to remain anonymous because of Vandalism and Abusive Offence on my pages that I have written.
Please DO NOT CONTA|CT Me again. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvqnp940a ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
You ave contact me again with another username/identity. This is precisely WHAT I DO NOT WANT. Please do not contact me AGAIN. Every time that i write in EDIT SUMMARY - there are persistent Vandalism, hacking, Deleting, and BOT junk e mails disrupting my account. PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT at Parliament wiki pages against. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvqnp940a ( talk • contribs) 08:33, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.
If you no longer wish to receive notifications for this case please remove your name from the listing here
For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias ( T)( C) 19:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Responding to
this. You pointed me in the direction of the guidelines, so I went there and found
WP:NOBAN:In general, it is usual to avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages other than where it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful.
This is jus in case you weren't aware of it. I'm not intereseted in debating this: I don't think messing about with the talk pages of others like that is very productive, but it's equally unproductive to be arguing about the title of a templated message that was posted last year to the talk page of a user who is now blocked. –
Uanfala (talk)
10:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
Are you sure those moves are incorrect? After all, the category was emptied yesterday.... -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 10:19, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender, hope you are doing well! I was thinking of changing the name of the article, long time is gone since the last consensus, and it is not accurate, and not descriptive. I was thinking Basque conflict prisoners should work out, without having to come to more controversial terms like political or terrorist. What do you think? Iñaki LL ( talk) 10:52, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I really don't want to get in to this but forgetting the religious aspect, with your degrees I assume you are familiar with the Gospels. Thus you must know Nicodemus from John, and I can't imagine how the name is confusing. I could always pick The_Rake or The_Harlot but those days are over for me. Nicodemus ( talk) 22:38, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I misunderstood what you meant--as should be clear from what I wrote. I will take care of things in the AM. It is rather late here now. You are the only person in 5 or more years to complain about this. I imagine anyone who references St. David's Day on their page knows about Nicodemus-- sorry about that also. Nicodemus ( talk) 02:39, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
I’m sorry but reverting once is not edit warring. But clearly it’s important to you to keep the brackets so I won’t change it. Rusted AutoParts 11:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Softlavender, I noticed where you asked me: "So now sincerely wanting to know the truth is peculiar to Yeshiva students?" Everyone is in search of the truth, perhaps though on different levels, and no one should be punished for that. I'm sorry if I insinuated otherwise. Davidbena ( talk) 00:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Not worth my effort. Do keep the adds-nothing flannel. Ironman1104 ( talk) 14:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi - I am posting the notice of DS to everybody recently active on Sarah Jeong who has not had a notice of these DS in the past year.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Jytdog ( talk) 14:29, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I typed correctly great Dane, but then I decided to make it Great Dane, and then I changed my mind yet again and meant to change it to great Dane but ended up deleting the first letter instead. I didn't notice it until Favonian replied. Ironic considering the section I wrote below. I used to almost never make mistakes when typing, while still typing at 100 wpm, but neither the speed nor the accuracy rate is as good as it used to be.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Soft, thank you for your kind words at ARCA. I just wanted to say, the topic ban is from American politics, broadly construed. [12] Well, technically from "post-1932 American politics, broadly construed", but there's no real difference, is there — surely not in this case. I don't understand why you think it's too narrow. Bishonen | talk 19:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC).
Perhaps you could lead off your planned discussion of my edits on the talk page by answering my question for you - the reason you have for considering the additional information unnecessary. You could followed that by the reason my choice of words is not an improvement on yours - which are difficult to read and lack important information about the subject of the article. Eddaido ( talk) 08:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I am curious to know that why you created User:Oldsilenus and User talk:Oldsilenus? I requested them to delete because user requested to rename to old username and redirect cause problem when we rename back to old usernames. ‐‐ 1997kB ( talk) 12:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't the closing comment there say that Davidbena has been topic-banned, not the filer? Maybe I'm missing something, since the filer also seems to be indeffed. - 165.234.252.11 ( talk) 17:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Yw; let's see if it survives!
Mathglot (
talk)
09:59, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
[13] Sheesh. Any ideas? Nikkimaria ( talk) 12:47, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
My AN/I thread that you just answered now has users who have WP:BULLY'd me in the past making arbitrary and broad complaints that are unhinged and even lies (than can be proven in my TP). One of those particular users that showed up suspiciously decided to 'noping' me when referencing my name. That is the same user that, on my TP, PA'd me for being a fan of the Washington Times, Fox News, etc. on the same day! Now there are two admins that showed up who say they are banning me!!!!!????? They want to ban me for the thing that you said wasn't wrong. I would appreciate it tremendously if you could see my rebuttal on that thread and help me out here. Thanks. -GDP ⇧ 08:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm contacting you because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amy_Siskind and responded to W C M's lack of genuine effort/following of policy. I don't know if you saw their AfD comments targeted toward a project I'm involved in, WP:WPWIR, but I'm also contacting you because you're not involved in the project. For full disclosure, I had this ...discussion? with them here on this subject. I've noticed that ever since this AfD of his, they've gone from no AfD participation since May 2016 to 9 delete votes in the past two weeks, all on women's biographies, so I'm pretty sure they're stalking the Wikiproject's article alerts (their edits in Wikipedia: namespace). This doesn't seem to fit in any of the dispute resolution boards but I don't know if this is worth taking to ANI etc; since they don't seem to be familiar with notability policy/AfD, they're not very effective (or maybe they're trolling or just doing it to feel better?), but it really doesn't seem healthy or productive. Do you have any advice? Much appreciated. (Edit: Wow. Not to sound like the user above me, I promise I'm competent.) originalmess how u doin that busta rhyme? 14:41, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender. Please see this thread at ANI, which includes a link to a previous thread you commented on. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:56, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Thinking about you. Hope you are safe. Best wishes ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 19:04, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
In regard to this edit: Where is the proper forum to seek consensus for a thing like this? Michael Hardy ( talk) 03:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This insinuates misuse of the tools on my part-- that I acted against consensus and then abused the community's trust to enforce that action. To be clear I responded to a request at WP:RFPP, saw what looked like a bizarre yet clear-cut need for protection and protected the disputed page. As the request was for indefinite full protection and I protected for two days, I think it was a measured, reasonable and even-handed response. I noted on the talk page at the time that I disagreed with the blanking and felt that other remedies were available. I would also like to point out that the protection was mooted by the number of admins edit warring on the page. Any of them could have unblanked. The only way I new about this insinuation was I was mentioned in the ANI thread by someone pointing out my lack of involvement. I would certainly appreciate it if you would notify me when calling my actions into question, especially on a notice board like ANI, or first raise your concerns on my talk page. Thanks, -- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 12:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Re this post: the RfC already did have a brief and simple question, and it may be found at the start of the section, preceded by the word "Brief". The upshot on the RfC listings is that one entry has been replaced by something that is not much different (in fact it is three words longer), and since the rfcid was changed, all the inward links have been broken. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 14:15, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Honestly their comportment at AN/I is a big part of the reason I'm opposing the actions they're supportingLess receptive to your comments than I'd otherwise be. Notwithstanding that I suspect canvassing led to the influx of frequently correlated accounts all singing from the same songbook, their combative tone toward any dissent is really off-putting. Like they're calling me a liar because I disagree with them? No.
Simonm223 (
talk)
13:48, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm the editor who started the discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard about using yearbooks as sources. Anyway, thanks for your participation. I see you've been editing Snyder's bio. Looks good. I'm writing because I added content in the lead, which I see you just removed, about Snyder's ubiquitous advertising. I did so because it's the overwhelming, or perhaps only, reason Snyder is notable. Therefore, I was shocked there wasn't anything about it in the lead. The Pittsburgh area has literally thousands of lawyers, but Snyder became notable because he completely saturated television and other media (radio, magazines, phone books, etc.) with his advertising. It made him very famous (or infamous, depending on one's outlook) and put his name recognition locally at nearly 100%, according to sourcing already in the article. So I felt it was vital to expand the lead to include why he became so well known and therefore notable. Without the massive advertising, he almost surely would not be Wikipedia notable. What do you think? 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 ( talk) 13:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
I couldn't have put it better myself. But there are people defending these daft and dubious stubs to the hilt... Sigh... Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
To my knowledge, I'm the only active member on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Arab Emirates - and one of the lapsed ones is Mr Geography. I'm onto Ras Al Khaimah next and it's a truly Augean task... The NUMBER of 'Keep, it might be useful' responses has amazed me and when I tried to create a similar stub for an EXISTING location, it got speedy deleted and moved to draft. Le sigh. Thanks for the smiles, though! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 14:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
A final and heartfelt thanks - I got to the end of the whole Ras Al Khaimah mess. :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 09:34, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Regarding Edgar Snyder, what are you trying to prove by continually restoring unsourced, contentious content to a BLP? You have been editing long enough to know that you do not add information that is not contained in the sources. This is your third warning about this. We write what the sources say, not what we assume happened after that. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 ( talk) 15:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
I really appreciate the improvements you have added to my little article idea SL. Wikipedia:Squirrel! may need a further member in it's listing! Kind regards, Simon Adler ( talk) 06:17, 16 September 2018 (UTC) |
Haha yes, squirrelling is fun! Congrats on your first article, Si, and thanks for the strawberries!
Softlavender (
talk)
06:20, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
I am very sorry for the way i have acted. I should not get my personal life involved with editing. I enjoy editing and all my edits are detailed and good. I like watching Hollyoaks and i feel like i am helping them while editing the characters. I promise to stay away from User raintheone if she stays away from my editing Thank you Pdineen03 ( talk) 17:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
This is still going on?! Feel free to remove this S. MarnetteD| Talk 18:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
It would be really great if you could please be more AGF with john's items as to whether they are nonsense or not, I could wordbomb here about the problems that have been discussed at length on mcnabs talk page - it is very easy to judge - but somewhat more problematic (If you are indeed and arabic speaker with knowledge of the middle east, please check me - my original expertise is Indonesia) - than meets the eye - to litter AFD's with 'nonsense' may fulfil some need for your part, but I would be very cautious as to indiscretions by many here on wp - who think they have a valid source - that turns out to be, in many cases complete and utter BS through no fault of their own. salaam. JarrahTree 05:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
I didn't realize the definition of "MVPD" had been removed. I'm not sure if what I did to restore the definition was correct, but it's as good a place as any. The article went through a major overhaul. I had contributed a lot of the content prior to the overhaul but I've pretty much left it alone since then.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Please don't blanket revert thousands of longstanding bytes without discussion first. Most of the notable people without their own Wikipages are notable enough to warrant their own Wikipage. That's the WP:burden. Your understanding of this issue is not correct. Did you happen to see the note left above by the reviewer on my Talk page regarding a new article I created? The standard is that those listed with refs who could warrant their own page qualify to remain in the notable people section, rather than people who already have Wikipages created. But your thinking defies logic, because you're implying that until a Wikipage is created, one is not notable - but a Wikipage cannot be created in the first place unless one is notable. Does that make sense? Castncoot ( talk) 06:14, 2 October 2018 (UTC) Castncoot ( talk) 06:10, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
If you got the energy, there's another bunch of those useless geostubs over at AfD! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 11:21, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
You know, it's almost worth the effort of the cleanup to read your marvellously grumpy Delete votes! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 13:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding what you have done.
Leo1pard (
talk)
11:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits at the Dan O'Keefe page. If you have the interest at some point there is a similar COI tag at Festivus, which would be nice to have removed before December. O'Keefe edited that page quite a bit, but I've had it watchlisted and there doesn't seem to be any major violations but good additions to the concept and history of the topic. Thanks again. Randy Kryn ( talk) 12:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
GAB gab 17:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Awww, thanks, that was very sweet of you!!! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 09:58, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
You may imagine that I would have appreciated it if you'd said that the first time you reverted, instead of just using rollback with no explanation, especially considering that I provided an explanation for my revert and that it was clearly not vandalism. I'm not interested in edit-warring, though. Mr rnddude ( talk) 18:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for my missteps. Thank you for your help with the format. 71.56.169.162 ( talk) 00:54, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
-- sent you that study discussed at the Yanardag article. Look over pp 522-523 and then we can proceed. Montanabw (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
There were 3 editors who all agreed the lists are redundant. The NYTimes timeline is redundancy - we don't need a photo of the NYTimes building. The other timeline is already in the prose. There was no justification to your reverting information that is purely redundant. Your actions are disruptive. Atsme 📞 📧 11:54, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (
talk)
00:57, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at Kudpung's talk page.
07:35, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Since I don't want to bother you any longer, I'd want to fix the talk page issues I had. So I was replying to the other user and not to you, that is why I put the same amount of colons as you (an additional one to what you are replying to). So, can you help me with this?-- ZiaLater ( talk) 05:04, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Since you have been so involved with the article, I thought you'd be interested in this.-- ZiaLater ( talk) 10:56, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
I made a case on WP:COIN and WP:RFP. Also, some of E-DemSnoopy's edits could be reverted since they aren't really notable and are just filler in the article to promote Smartmatic. However, this is difficult for me since it somewhat balances the POV in the article. We can worry about this later since I am more concerned about further POV/COI edits. It seems that without protection, the article will have continuous accounts coming from nowhere.-- ZiaLater ( talk) 21:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at Kudpung's talk page.
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (
talk)
05:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
YGM. If the link didn't work, let me know. I've cleaned up the list. To get the red links you'll have to go through the list and put square brackets round the page names and save the list again. If you want anything else, let me know and I'll mail it to you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 08:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
The event is in the article. If you can't see it, let me know and I'll show the words. Please stop making such pointy edits. The Rambling Man ( talk) 20:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
jps (
talk)
11:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Casting_aspersions Atsme 📞 📧 02:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in there. Hillbillyholiday has ceased the mass deletions and edit warring, but, like I stated at WP:ANI, I'm certain that the disruption will start back up again. Hillbillyholiday is just biding his time, waiting for the matter to cool down, and will be right back at it afterward. I'm not sure that I want to be the one to start a WP:ANI thread on this editor in the future, especially when there are administrators not paying attention to the case or giving it the serious attention it deserves. You are at WP:ANI a lot more than I am, and administrators might be more willing to listen to you if you start a thread on the editor in the future. In the past, administrators would be more concerned about any WP:ANI thread I started, but it's a different story these days (for whatever reason). Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 19:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
And, yeah, I know that the weekends (especially Sundays) are slow on Wikipedia, but still. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 19:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Just saw your ping today re the sockpuppet investigation for Caesar's ghost. I was on holiday (in the Basque country, ironically enough) so now I'm back I'll keep an eye on those articles. Valenciano ( talk) 11:30, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Could you please join the discussion at /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Appeal_of_community_sanctions_placed_on_User:Barts1a Twitbook space tube 12:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender. I don't think that the non-free File:1938-xmas-tiny-tim.jpg is needed any longer per WP:NFCC#1 because there are some feely licensed images of the actor available in c:Category:Terry Kilburn which could be used instead for identification purposes; so, I have tagged the file with {{ rfu}}. The Commons' files appear to have been uploaded a few years after you uploaded the non-free one to Wikipedia, and unless you feel they should be deleted from Commons for some reason or the non-free one can somehow be converted to public domain for some reason, one of them should be used instead. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
If you don't want the sentences removed, please tell us why in the talk page. Currently, no one has objected. Thanks.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 00:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback. Use rollback on an article talk page on anything but vandalism is wildly inappropriate. Please be more mindful of your privileges going forward. — nihlus kryik ( talk) 13:12, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
ridiculous procedural grounds like this is a courtroom or something. TimothyJosephWood 14:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Given the text of the remedy here, I don't think I agree with your statement here. However, I'd like to hear your thinking on it. As far as I can see, as soon as the editor makes a complaint on a noticeboard, that noticeboard becomes a "page reasonably construed as being related to the Arab-Israeli conflict," and I think the text of the first exception at least implies that noticeboard discussions are intended to be included in the prohibition. But I'll agree that the wording could be a lot clearer on this. Unless I'm missing something, I may well end up asking the question at ARCA. A penny for your thoughts? GoldenRing ( talk) 21:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Dear Softlavender,
I am very concerned about some of your edits on the Peter Levy page, in which you have removed a lot of information. Whilst I can understand you removing some uncited points, you have removed at least two points that have been correctly cited.
Also, please can you explain your reasons for removing the Radio Humberside section, and I note that you have suggested that this was as the 'entire section was WP:OR and WP:SYNTH'. Please can you clarify under what point does the section fall under WP:OR/SYNTH.
Thank you.
-- Zoyetu ( talk) 20:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Only warning. If you continue to make WP:ASPERSIONS about me in any setting such as you did on WP:AN and WP:ANI, I will seek to have you sanctioned. — nihlus kryik ( talk) 15:09, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 13 September 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Mkdw talk 05:21, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
FYI The IP hopper content removed. Previously archived by an IP in March 2017. Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 22:33, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Seem to have been more editing from Kerala on Social work: here Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 04:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender, can you state the policy you were applying in this edit please. -- de Facto ( talk). 08:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I updated the article and included in it both Android and iOS apps. Please review it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by SipleDailyUser ( talk • contribs) 08:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Re this, what's the alternative? Are you suggesting that we stop copying his comments? Do we recognize any right to a self-defense? If so, where is the line? ― Mandruss ☎ 04:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsure why you removed the edit "In September 2017, outside an airport in Los Angeles, Bourdain threatened to poison U.S. President Donald Trump if given the chance ref https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwxBVX7HZtU /ref" Given that this is a factual statement, an event which occurred on video, and certainly adds to the section in which is was placed, discussing Bourdain's public persona. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glialsupporter ( talk • contribs) 11:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender, thank you for your comments at my RfA. I hope that I'll be able to answer your concerns with my actions rather than my words. Cheers, ansh 666 23:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks.
Other than the fact that there were some active FFD/CSD's I'd have asked you to monitor User:ShakespeareFan00 closely.
And thanks for letting the other party know about the AN thread. I perhaps should have left that notification myself? Time to take an extended wiki-break, to allow tempers to cool down. ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 09:14, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello Softlavender. Per the articleinfo results the person you are obliquely referring to must be User:A.S. Brown. In your posting to User:Drmies could you clarify if that is the case? Also, one would normally expect some discussion on the article talk about this. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 14:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Winged Blades of Godric On leave 11:35, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Family guy#Participant survey, about resolving questions not resolved in the earlier RfC. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 17:48, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
I see you've been working on Wiki for ten years. You should therefore know that no one can edit an article which bears the template "in use" which you nonetheless did which resulted in the loss of 5 references and 5 external links that I had added. Wiki being a collaborative encyclopedy, feel free to repair you error. Thanks; LouisAlain ( talk) 10:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
I was looking at your recent postings to ANI and though how sensible, those look like someone with experience around here. I then noticed on you home page that you have been editing for more than 10 years which confirmed my suspicion. So I ran interaction tool, and that is why I did not recognise the user name. It seems that the only time where we have previously posted to the same section in less than a day was an RfC on Talk:Simon Collins (I was only there to fire fight.) So not surprising that I did not recognise the user name. Keep up the good work. -- PBS ( talk) 20:48, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I am reaching out to you about a recent dispute you were involved in regarding the Smartmatic article. From my understanding, you commented on the case after user ZiaLater reported users Carriedevalle23 and E-Dem snoopy for a possible conflict of interest. I am writing an in-depth article about the management of Wikipedia and I am trying to learn more about situations like yours. Would you be willing to talk to me more about this situation? -- Investigativereporter ( talk) 14:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Still haven't found a 60s screening date in the US but I have two more sources that establish it was filmed in 1967. The first is an article from the Sydney Morning Herald for 14 Jan 1968 about designer Lex Aitkin stating "Recently he has completed two houses for Susannah York as well as the sets for her new American film, A Month in the Country." The second is an article about Susannah York from the Detroit American 9 July 1968 stating she "appeared in the lead opposite her husband, English actor Michael Wells, in a screen version of the successful London theatre show "A Month in the Country," directed by Wells." There's another article about Susannah from the Chicago Tribune-Sun for 16 August 1970 talking about the staging of the play by York and Wells in 1967 but it doesn't say anything making a film of it which implies it hadn't been screened by 1970.
The earliest screening I can find is July 1978 on CBC Channel 9 in July 1978 where it was seen in both Canada and the northern US. If you want pdf's of all these I can email them to you.
A factor about the film that might be relevant is that is was the first colour TV film made for the American market - this is cited in the obituary of designer Alan Pickford in The Times 21 March 2003 - so it could be that the American TV companies decided not to screen the show until the use of colour TVs was more widespread? Nthep ( talk) 17:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Nthep ( talk) 13:56, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
PS: It's weird per your provided newspaper page that it aired in Michigan in July 1978 (same as in Canada) on the local CBS affiliate, but no evidence to your knowledge that it aired elsewhere in the U.S. on that date? Softlavender ( talk) 00:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Zoyetu and August 2017 BLP Topic Ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
I removed a duplicated comment - you clearly did not make the exact comment twice in the same thread with the same time stamp. I'm also not an involved editor in anyway at all so your revert of my close was mistitled. Legacypac ( talk) 04:41, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
The previous people involved in the discussion of Template talk:Marriage are being contacted to help gain consensus. -- RAN ( talk) 23:46, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
That's why you are removed my content about Anthony Bourdain? Do you think I'm lie ? Please try read about this information Ministry of Foreign affairs of Azerbaijan Republic. HajisoyE ( talk) 08:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC) https://www.cntraveler.com/story/anthony-bourdain-has-been-blacklisted-by-azerbaijan-after-visiting-disputed-territory
With respect to your comment on my talk page, I found it rather rude, and I think you don't need to police Wikipedia in such a way. Everything I have added in my edits is true and verifiable, and fully relevant to and noteworthy for the subject of the encycolpedia pages. There is nothing wrong with saying certain literary works exist, when they do, and there is evidence to show that they do. There is no self-promotion in the text of my edits, any more than there is in any of the other listings of such works as I list. Bubbly1558 ( talk) 00:21, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You wrote We don't use group images for infoboxes - can you point to where that is a policy or guideline? Thanks. -- GRuban ( talk) 22:59, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
All right, I admit it; the cropped photos actually look better in the two articles I put the whole one in. Here, I see you're working on Indigo children? Maybe this will help. It's not very good resolution, but, it's a free image. -- GRuban ( talk) 00:42, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
A flower, then? Feel free to remove this too if it bothers you. I just want to say thanks for helping, despite my best efforts to resist. -- GRuban ( talk) 01:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing my edit to Beethoven. While "irascible" may be a common adjective for you, it is not common for me. I had to look up the definition. I did know what deafness and bipolar disorder mean, yet links have been provided for readers who do not know their meanings. I suggest either replacing the word "irascible" with a more common word such as "ill-tempered," or "cranky," or add a phrase clarifying the meaning. I will watch this spot for other suggestions you may have for improving the article. Thanks again for reviewing my edit. Comfr ( talk) 17:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
That material had been challenged. I missed the earlier explanation by the original editor on the talk page, but there is still no consensus to include it. I don't see anything particularly useful in describing how chocolate is made and as far as I see there is nothing special about the description that is particular to this chocolate bar, so I agree that it should not be included in the article. Meters ( talk) 01:36, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
You are edit warring at Pardon of Joe Arpaio and restoring a challenged BLP violation that was removed twice, claiming in your edit summary that the article is not a BLP. Please stop edit warring. You have been an editor long enough to know BLP policy, and have been asked to discuss making changes beforehand on the TP. You also need to revisit the source you cited because it is one person's "perspective" on Arpaio, it is not about the pardon; therefore, a questionable source. You have not attempted to discuss anything and chose to edit war instead. You are not even trying to collaborate in a collegial manner with others. I have taken the BLP vio concerns to BLPN. Atsme 📞 📧 13:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
I put my additional comments under my original request for a good reason: because it needs to be read by those reading the request and not lost in the comments below. I'd appreciate it if you move it back right away. Truth be told, you should have asked first and/or notified me since they are my comments (and I was clear in why I placed them where I did in the comments themselves). Thanks for your cooperation. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Why are you not an admin? GMG talk 01:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Hey Softlavender, hope you're well. As I'm sure you saw, Datari Turner's page got deleted, but I appreciate you stepping in with your comments about WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, WP:NOIMPROVEMENT and WP:GNG. I am going to review a few of the guidelines with my client, and should we decide to re-submit to AfC, I wanted to see if you'd be courteous enough to volunteer your time to quickly review our draft to see if you think it passes guidelines for notability / neutral language? Would be much appreciated. Let me know. Thanks! JacobMW ( talk) 16:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Megalibrarygirl: (pinging you since you also did some work on the article) Hey there, I saw you took an interest in editing Ruth Jones article. I have additional drafts at AfC, Deborah Gebhardt, Joey Vrazel, and Marsha Reall, if you are interested in improving them. I believe I have enough citations for notability, but if you think I need more, I can scrape newspapers.com or other sources for additional sources. Thanks for your work on the Purdue athletics articles, and if you do not want to or have time to edit these, no worries! Kees08 (Talk) 20:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 ( talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
It's not because I particularly want a reply, or further conversation, but for curiosity and my archives: did you receive my e-mail, which I sent via the "e-mail this user" function yesterday? Bishonen | talk 17:32, 2 December 2017 (UTC).
Hello, Softlavender. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
You are being notified because you participated in a previous AN/I report about this editor. Another report has been filed here. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 05:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
I see you redirected the article,but how long does that take? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daquan7474 ( talk • contribs) 06:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
you wrote this- Redirect to Nuestra Belleza El Salvador#Representatives in Big Four pageants, per NewYorkActuary, and full protect the Redirect. We've got a massive sock/meat farm constantly trying to pump up or recreate the entry (as evidenced even by the participation in this AfD), so we need protection against that. Softlavender (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
so I am confused,what are you doing with the article? keep or redirect?
the discussion is closed on the administrator noticeboard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daquan7474 ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I have not editited the Julia Mora article anymore. But I have been watching you. Its obvious this article is going tp either be redirected or deleted. why is that still ongoing? do you ever sleep softlavender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daquan7474 ( talk • contribs) 10:26, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Julia Mora. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Lacypaperclip ( talk) 08:55, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Please don't reply to other people's messages. It is rude. Thanks. And please don't talk to me again. Thanks. Mister Sneeze A Lot ( talk) 12:19, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits, such as those to
Bazooka (instrument), appear to be
intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally
unpopular way, are highly
disruptive and can lead to a
block or
ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through
dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you. There is no question, no question whatever that the use of the image at issue violated NFCC#1. It is obviously replaceable. Per its rationale, its only purpose is simple illustration. The only way use of a nonfree image for this purpose could be justified would be if no bazookas existed at all, like it was an extinct species. This is an extraordinarily simple point, aand any reasonable, competent editor should be able to grasp it. Moreover, at the time BMK added the nonfree image to the relevant article, the article actually included an external link to a source of free images for the article! Your dislike of rigorous NFCC enforcement does not entitle you to blithely restore obvious violations to Wikipedia articles. That is, in fact, blockable editing.
The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (
talk)
06:28, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
If there is a PD image, it has to be used and the non-free image has to be deleted. Please don't continue restoring it. We hope ( talk) 13:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Yes of course I understand the difference between deletion and redirection. Don't try to patronise me – I'm far too long in tooth for that. I couldn't care less what the effect of deletion or redirection has for editors, admins or oversighters; I'm simply interested in what the effect is for our readers, and I'm astonished that you don't appear to grasp that both redirection and deletion removes the content from the sight of 99.9% of the visitors to the page. Readers don't go ferreting through the page history of a redirect to find content that's been hidden from them, even though in theory they could. I have to say I'm extremely disappointed in how you've interacted with Atsme. Either you've forgotten that redirection removes the content from the view of our readership (and therefore really does have the same effect as deletion) or you're aware of that and you're playing semantic games with her. In whichever case, it's very unbecoming conduct. -- RexxS ( talk) 16:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
You participated in Template talk:Marriage last time about end=died and end=divorced, now there is a question about including the year that a marriage ends for completeness, or leaving it off for brevity. -- RAN ( talk) 22:28, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Why did you revert the edits by 91.49.71.240? I checked the edits, and the entire chart was indeed supported by a circular reference. Boomer Vial Happy Holidays! • Contribs 01:33, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Why have you rolled back my edit to Age of consent? I get that it may look odd by an IP but that table is entirely unsourced, or rather sourced to other wikipedia articles(which from my understanding is the same). At least a note why you rolled it back would be appreciated. I can only learn if i know what i did wrong. 91.49.71.240 ( talk) 01:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Boomer Vial and 91.49.71.240: Please see the article's talk page. Please also keep content discussions on article talk rather than usertalk. Softlavender ( talk) 01:46, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi, with
this edit you posted a comment that contained this segment; "...anyone who does not have that admin-wannabe userbox)
". You appear to be using the term "wanna-be" pejoratively, and since literally thousands of editors have one of several variations of the "I'm not an admin, but might like to be one someday" userbox on their userpage, you have basically insulted all of them. My question is, that wasn't your intention, was it? -
theWOLFchild
06:42, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
I've caused this year to end on a chord of disappointment for many, but I hope that despite my mistakes and the differences in opinion and perspectives, and regardless of what the outcome is or in what capacity I can still contribute in the coming year, we can continue working together directly or indirectly on this encyclopedic project, whose ideals are surely carried by both of our hearts. I'm hoping I have not fallen in your esteem to the level where "no hard feelings" can no longer ring true, because I highly respect you and your dedication to Wikipedia, and I sincerely wish you and your loved ones all the best for 2018.
|
It's that time of the year, SoftL. No fancy template, but just wishing you all the best for the holidays and the new year. It's probably a lot warmer where I am than where you are 😎 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 04:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Happy holidays, Softlavender. Wishing you well, looking forward to learning more from you. Sending greetings from Kyoto, Japan. Alex Shih ( talk) 08:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello Softlavender: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 16:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
So I've come upon another interesting predicament. I've noticed two users, both particularly interested in Costa Rica and Buddhism (pretty unique), making a series of consecutive edits. I saw this and it raised some questions. However, I also saw this investigation which made things even more confusing. I'm asking your oversight since you have more experiences with potential socks. An explanation of this relationship would be helpful as well.
Happy Holidays! -- ZiaLater ( talk) 23:24, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
The article Richard Zobel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Lacks notability fails WP:ENT since he only has had minor roles
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Rusf10 (
talk)
01:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
May you have very Happy Holidays, Softlavender ...
and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!
Best wishes,
Voceditenore (
talk)
07:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:IanCharleson.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:For Ian Charleson A Tribute cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Merry Christmas Softlavender!!
Hi Softlavender, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia!
,
–
Davey2010
Merry Xmas / Happy New Year
13:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holidays |
From Stave one of Dickens
A Christmas Carol
So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD| Talk 02:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC) |
Your recent editing history at ETA (separatist group) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 16:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Compliments of the season Wishing you all the best for 2018 — good health, sufficient wealth, peace and contentment | |
Cheers! ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 18:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading File:For Ian Charleson A Tribute cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:10, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Softlavender,
The sources listed are coming from Allmusic.com and have since been removed from their website. If you look at Billboard.com itself, it will become evident that the soundtrack album did not return to #1 and hasn't since the 1960's. Check both the Billboard #1 albums of 2010 and 2013 and that title does not appear on any week, with Billboard.com as a source backing that up. Additionally, Allmusic was known to copy and paste numbers on any album reentry instead of presenting a newer reentry peak.
Please evaluate that decision.
~~WolfSpear Orion XXV ( talk) 06:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thank you for reaching out to me. I apologize for.the miscommunication. I haven't communicated with other users yet so it's still a bit confusing to me learning to navigate on here. I trimmed the Ali/Clay paragraph on the Malcolm X page and posted. I also corrected the Blood Brothers book citation. I appreciate the feedback. Twixister ( talk) 10:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Happy Holiday Barnstar | |
How about combining a Barnstar with a Christmas Card? That is why this message is appearing on your talk page. Simultaneously and at the same time, this barnstar is conferred upon you because during this past year you worked and contributed your time to improve the encyclopedia. You also have received far too little recognition for your contributions. In addition, this is a small attempt at spreading holiday cheer. I've appreciated your work. The Best of Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ and Merry Christmas 01:01, 17 December 2017 (UTC) |
![]() |
Happy New Year! Best wishes for 2018, — Paleo Neonate – 13:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC) |
Martinevans123
(Santa's Drop-in Centre) ... sends you ...
... warmest seasonal wishes for ......
Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.
Oi,
"Softie"... Hoping that Christmas may bless you with
peace, love and understanding... and wishing that you have a good
run in 2018!!
Softlavender,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
-- ψλ ●
✉
✓
23:30, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Dropping by to wish you a SAFE & HAPPY New Year celebration, Softlavender. Stay warm wherever you are and be safe - watch the other guy!! HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! Atsme 📞 📧 23:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I've been meaning to ask for some time; is your username a joke of some sort? I ask because it often reminds me of a less crude version of an old handle I used to use on BBS systems, "MuleCrevice", which I chose because substituting both words with synonyms yields "JackassCrack". (Admittedly, I was about 15 when I thought it up). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Comments like that make me question if there's any point to fixing my errors at all. I only wish to improve, not be treated as someone who can't be trusted to enforce what the community wants. I assure you, I don't get anything out of being skewered at those boards... especially when there are a few dozen editors that show up on every error I make to correct me. It only takes one administrator to make me change my actions usually these days, unless dealing with Arbitration Enforcement. That area is an entirely different animal I've been trying to tame for years, and it's one in which many editors/admins like to throw shame on admins who enforce no matter if they're just doing what the policies state. This isn't easy, and I don't expect it to be. But, I don't want to be forced to also abandon enforcing in the AP topic area, just to not come under constant scrutiny as if I'm getting kicks off of blocking people. Was it fun to use the button against vandals and whatnot when I first got it 10 years ago? Sure... but that "oh this is neat" feeling went away a long, long time ago (within the first 6 months of having the responsibility). I'm still a sysop here today because I don't believe in giving up on the idea of the world not being misinformed... regardless of whether I've given up on myself. And the reason I performed so many scrutinized actions upon my recent return is because I simply lost a lot of ground when I had to be away in attempting to ensure the topic area was being properly patrolled. It isn't because I've fallen off my rocker... although that could be said of why I left. - I have no idea if posting on your talk page will have any impact on your understanding of my motivations/actions/character, but I felt the need to at least say something if you think I've really become a bad apple in the bunch. I've got to get offline however. I have a flight to catch in 4 hours... and I've not gotten any sleep now. (Just have to post one more thing to a thread at AN.) — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 16:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
If you find time for it could you take a look at my recent noms at TAFI Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Nominations. Would appreciate no matter what !vote as no one is attending the TAFI nom page anymore to give input. Regards,-- BabbaQ ( talk) 19:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Well...the problem is that there is no requisite category Category:20th-century women singers right now. I'd be happy to create one and move those other articles into it, but right now it feels like those are the only two options we've got. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 05:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:People of the Earth Hopman.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi. What do you think about your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Nassar and the existence of Bruce McArthur? Best wishes, my friend. :) Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 13:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
The leek is one of the national emblems of Wales, worn along with the daffodil (in Welsh, the daffodil is known as "Peter's leek", Cenhinen Bedr) on St. David's Day. According to one legend, King Cadwaladr of Gwynedd ordered his soldiers to identify themselves by wearing the vegetable on their helmets in an ancient battle against the Saxons that took place in a leek field. [1] Cheers!‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 15:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
References
Joining the music, in a supporting role. (She created a Strauss role, of a servant.) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
There is an RfC at Talk:Daily Mail#Request for comment: Other criticisms section. Your input would be most helpful. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 12:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a bit confused about The World Only Spins Forward: The Ascent of Angels in America being a content fork? I created the article because I had seen/heard quite a lot of coverage about it both before and after its release, in the Washington Post, NYT, on NPR, and in quite a few smaller outlets, but then found no article. However, I've never done much substantive editing on book articles, so I checked the WP:NBOOKS page before creating it, and found that it at least met the WP:GNG. I'm not sure why it would qualify as a content fork? I mean, certainly the book itself could be used as a source to help add to the content in Angels in America, but it's an oral history about not only the play itself but also the context and impact of the play in a more broad sense, and includes content about LGBT history, the AIDS epidemic, politics, etc. on a more broad level, so it's more than just a straight recounting of the production history. Certainly right now it's just a stub (I was planning on expanding once I'd gotten a copy of the book and had time to go through all the coverage on it) but as far as I can tell, WP:REDUNDANTFORK and WP:POVFORK are the only unacceptable forks, so I'm not sure which one of those it falls under? Also, don't you typically merge forks, not delete them? Anyway, sorry for rambling, I'm a bit lost here, so I just wanted to understand a bit better about why you felt it should be deleted. Thank you! ElfLady64 ( talk) 06:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. Zigzig20s ( talk) 03:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
"So whatever you are trying to say, the OED is saying that the English phrase "useful idiot" does not seem to correspond"
: I just said above that I did not feel "reflect" was a direct synonym for "correspond to" or even "mirror". And "trying to say" is rude when it should've been quite clear. Like I am spouting gibberish? Just like the OED may be wrong about etymology, English majors may be wrong about English. To embody, represent or reflect something requires that that something existed beforehand. Also consider what "
reflect" means in physics in the sense of a mirror reflecting light. The light comes from a source, hits the mirror, and bounces off. And no this doesn't mean "mirror" is used to mean the same thing as reflect, I think it is used to mean more like "correspond to". Things can mirror each other at the same time, based on how we use the term. Mirror or correspond can be used to imply parallel existence but reflection implies prior existence.
—DIYeditor (
talk)
05:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Dear Softlavender, Francis Schonken does not seem to be respecting consensus at the moment. [3] That happened on a DYK hook created by Gerda, who has been helping me at her suggestion for two weeks or so (she asked me on her user talk page and I was happy to help her). Similarly consensus is not being respected in the accompanying article and the ongoing discussion, which involves reading a nuanced, carefully-written and lengthy chapter written in 2017. What is your advice? As encouraged by Gerda, I have contributed quite a lot to the main article and that is still happening. At the moment I want to write a brief paragraph about the Reformation in Strasbourg. It is easy to find reliable secondary sources. Thanks, Mathsci ( talk) 08:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Please don't invite other editors to edit war, like you did here. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 10:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Well from your comment it is clear that you may not know much about Manuel de Falla, and even less about his music. If you cared to even read the article on Wikipedia about him, you can read this: "There he met a number of composers who had an influence on his style, including the impressionists Maurice Ravel, Claude Debussy and Paul Dukas". He is also mentioned in the article "Musical impressionism". If you want concrete examples his work Nights in the Gardens of Spain is described as "impressionistic". Also I understand that you might not know about the history of Spanish classical music, but Falla, like virtually every Spanish composer of the late 19th century and beginning of 20th century, completed his musical education in Paris, and was influenced by French music (other examples are Isaac Albéniz, Enrique Granados and Joaquín Rodrigo). What I thought would be discussed about my edit was whether Falla was relevant enough to be included on the list or not. I did not expect someone making a fool out of himself arguing about an obvious fact, that Falla was influenced by Debussy. I mean, I try not to opinate and argue about something I know nothing about, and I expected everyone to do the same. That's why your comment is surprising for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.236.52 ( talk) 12:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Please, see WP:CON and WP:WAR. We can discuss any troubles and doubts about my/ your/ someone's else edits before such reverts: [6], [7], [8], [9]-- Tamtam90 ( talk) 22:47, 10 April 2018 (UTC).
Greetings!
I took a look at instances where Hullaballoo Wolfowitz's editing conduct has been discussed at ANI. You made a number of comments last December, in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive972#Edit warring to restore NFCC violation and unsourced claims
I found this edit of yours particularly interesting.
Thanks! Geo Swan ( talk) 02:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
The patience it takes to monitor the bimonthly thread where the next attempt (by the same players every month) to change Kiev to "Kyiv" will occur shortly! Thank you for your patience and persistence. -- Taivo ( talk) 03:35, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
mY Apologies for taking the liberty to write on your page, but I felt I must offer an explanation to your riposte.
I am aged 52, and have been writing this Wikipedian for over 15 years. Secondly, I wish to remain anonymous because of Vandalism and Abusive Offence on my pages that I have written.
Please DO NOT CONTA|CT Me again. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvqnp940a ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
You ave contact me again with another username/identity. This is precisely WHAT I DO NOT WANT. Please do not contact me AGAIN. Every time that i write in EDIT SUMMARY - there are persistent Vandalism, hacking, Deleting, and BOT junk e mails disrupting my account. PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT at Parliament wiki pages against. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvqnp940a ( talk • contribs) 08:33, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.
If you no longer wish to receive notifications for this case please remove your name from the listing here
For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias ( T)( C) 19:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Responding to
this. You pointed me in the direction of the guidelines, so I went there and found
WP:NOBAN:In general, it is usual to avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages other than where it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful.
This is jus in case you weren't aware of it. I'm not intereseted in debating this: I don't think messing about with the talk pages of others like that is very productive, but it's equally unproductive to be arguing about the title of a templated message that was posted last year to the talk page of a user who is now blocked. –
Uanfala (talk)
10:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
Are you sure those moves are incorrect? After all, the category was emptied yesterday.... -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 10:19, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender, hope you are doing well! I was thinking of changing the name of the article, long time is gone since the last consensus, and it is not accurate, and not descriptive. I was thinking Basque conflict prisoners should work out, without having to come to more controversial terms like political or terrorist. What do you think? Iñaki LL ( talk) 10:52, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I really don't want to get in to this but forgetting the religious aspect, with your degrees I assume you are familiar with the Gospels. Thus you must know Nicodemus from John, and I can't imagine how the name is confusing. I could always pick The_Rake or The_Harlot but those days are over for me. Nicodemus ( talk) 22:38, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I misunderstood what you meant--as should be clear from what I wrote. I will take care of things in the AM. It is rather late here now. You are the only person in 5 or more years to complain about this. I imagine anyone who references St. David's Day on their page knows about Nicodemus-- sorry about that also. Nicodemus ( talk) 02:39, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
I’m sorry but reverting once is not edit warring. But clearly it’s important to you to keep the brackets so I won’t change it. Rusted AutoParts 11:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Softlavender, I noticed where you asked me: "So now sincerely wanting to know the truth is peculiar to Yeshiva students?" Everyone is in search of the truth, perhaps though on different levels, and no one should be punished for that. I'm sorry if I insinuated otherwise. Davidbena ( talk) 00:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Not worth my effort. Do keep the adds-nothing flannel. Ironman1104 ( talk) 14:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi - I am posting the notice of DS to everybody recently active on Sarah Jeong who has not had a notice of these DS in the past year.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Jytdog ( talk) 14:29, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I typed correctly great Dane, but then I decided to make it Great Dane, and then I changed my mind yet again and meant to change it to great Dane but ended up deleting the first letter instead. I didn't notice it until Favonian replied. Ironic considering the section I wrote below. I used to almost never make mistakes when typing, while still typing at 100 wpm, but neither the speed nor the accuracy rate is as good as it used to be.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Soft, thank you for your kind words at ARCA. I just wanted to say, the topic ban is from American politics, broadly construed. [12] Well, technically from "post-1932 American politics, broadly construed", but there's no real difference, is there — surely not in this case. I don't understand why you think it's too narrow. Bishonen | talk 19:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC).
Perhaps you could lead off your planned discussion of my edits on the talk page by answering my question for you - the reason you have for considering the additional information unnecessary. You could followed that by the reason my choice of words is not an improvement on yours - which are difficult to read and lack important information about the subject of the article. Eddaido ( talk) 08:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I am curious to know that why you created User:Oldsilenus and User talk:Oldsilenus? I requested them to delete because user requested to rename to old username and redirect cause problem when we rename back to old usernames. ‐‐ 1997kB ( talk) 12:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't the closing comment there say that Davidbena has been topic-banned, not the filer? Maybe I'm missing something, since the filer also seems to be indeffed. - 165.234.252.11 ( talk) 17:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Yw; let's see if it survives!
Mathglot (
talk)
09:59, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
[13] Sheesh. Any ideas? Nikkimaria ( talk) 12:47, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
My AN/I thread that you just answered now has users who have WP:BULLY'd me in the past making arbitrary and broad complaints that are unhinged and even lies (than can be proven in my TP). One of those particular users that showed up suspiciously decided to 'noping' me when referencing my name. That is the same user that, on my TP, PA'd me for being a fan of the Washington Times, Fox News, etc. on the same day! Now there are two admins that showed up who say they are banning me!!!!!????? They want to ban me for the thing that you said wasn't wrong. I would appreciate it tremendously if you could see my rebuttal on that thread and help me out here. Thanks. -GDP ⇧ 08:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm contacting you because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amy_Siskind and responded to W C M's lack of genuine effort/following of policy. I don't know if you saw their AfD comments targeted toward a project I'm involved in, WP:WPWIR, but I'm also contacting you because you're not involved in the project. For full disclosure, I had this ...discussion? with them here on this subject. I've noticed that ever since this AfD of his, they've gone from no AfD participation since May 2016 to 9 delete votes in the past two weeks, all on women's biographies, so I'm pretty sure they're stalking the Wikiproject's article alerts (their edits in Wikipedia: namespace). This doesn't seem to fit in any of the dispute resolution boards but I don't know if this is worth taking to ANI etc; since they don't seem to be familiar with notability policy/AfD, they're not very effective (or maybe they're trolling or just doing it to feel better?), but it really doesn't seem healthy or productive. Do you have any advice? Much appreciated. (Edit: Wow. Not to sound like the user above me, I promise I'm competent.) originalmess how u doin that busta rhyme? 14:41, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Softlavender. Please see this thread at ANI, which includes a link to a previous thread you commented on. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:56, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Thinking about you. Hope you are safe. Best wishes ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 19:04, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
In regard to this edit: Where is the proper forum to seek consensus for a thing like this? Michael Hardy ( talk) 03:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This insinuates misuse of the tools on my part-- that I acted against consensus and then abused the community's trust to enforce that action. To be clear I responded to a request at WP:RFPP, saw what looked like a bizarre yet clear-cut need for protection and protected the disputed page. As the request was for indefinite full protection and I protected for two days, I think it was a measured, reasonable and even-handed response. I noted on the talk page at the time that I disagreed with the blanking and felt that other remedies were available. I would also like to point out that the protection was mooted by the number of admins edit warring on the page. Any of them could have unblanked. The only way I new about this insinuation was I was mentioned in the ANI thread by someone pointing out my lack of involvement. I would certainly appreciate it if you would notify me when calling my actions into question, especially on a notice board like ANI, or first raise your concerns on my talk page. Thanks, -- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 12:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Re this post: the RfC already did have a brief and simple question, and it may be found at the start of the section, preceded by the word "Brief". The upshot on the RfC listings is that one entry has been replaced by something that is not much different (in fact it is three words longer), and since the rfcid was changed, all the inward links have been broken. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 14:15, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Honestly their comportment at AN/I is a big part of the reason I'm opposing the actions they're supportingLess receptive to your comments than I'd otherwise be. Notwithstanding that I suspect canvassing led to the influx of frequently correlated accounts all singing from the same songbook, their combative tone toward any dissent is really off-putting. Like they're calling me a liar because I disagree with them? No.
Simonm223 (
talk)
13:48, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm the editor who started the discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard about using yearbooks as sources. Anyway, thanks for your participation. I see you've been editing Snyder's bio. Looks good. I'm writing because I added content in the lead, which I see you just removed, about Snyder's ubiquitous advertising. I did so because it's the overwhelming, or perhaps only, reason Snyder is notable. Therefore, I was shocked there wasn't anything about it in the lead. The Pittsburgh area has literally thousands of lawyers, but Snyder became notable because he completely saturated television and other media (radio, magazines, phone books, etc.) with his advertising. It made him very famous (or infamous, depending on one's outlook) and put his name recognition locally at nearly 100%, according to sourcing already in the article. So I felt it was vital to expand the lead to include why he became so well known and therefore notable. Without the massive advertising, he almost surely would not be Wikipedia notable. What do you think? 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 ( talk) 13:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
I couldn't have put it better myself. But there are people defending these daft and dubious stubs to the hilt... Sigh... Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
To my knowledge, I'm the only active member on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Arab Emirates - and one of the lapsed ones is Mr Geography. I'm onto Ras Al Khaimah next and it's a truly Augean task... The NUMBER of 'Keep, it might be useful' responses has amazed me and when I tried to create a similar stub for an EXISTING location, it got speedy deleted and moved to draft. Le sigh. Thanks for the smiles, though! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 14:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
A final and heartfelt thanks - I got to the end of the whole Ras Al Khaimah mess. :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 09:34, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Regarding Edgar Snyder, what are you trying to prove by continually restoring unsourced, contentious content to a BLP? You have been editing long enough to know that you do not add information that is not contained in the sources. This is your third warning about this. We write what the sources say, not what we assume happened after that. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 ( talk) 15:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
I really appreciate the improvements you have added to my little article idea SL. Wikipedia:Squirrel! may need a further member in it's listing! Kind regards, Simon Adler ( talk) 06:17, 16 September 2018 (UTC) |
Haha yes, squirrelling is fun! Congrats on your first article, Si, and thanks for the strawberries!
Softlavender (
talk)
06:20, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
I am very sorry for the way i have acted. I should not get my personal life involved with editing. I enjoy editing and all my edits are detailed and good. I like watching Hollyoaks and i feel like i am helping them while editing the characters. I promise to stay away from User raintheone if she stays away from my editing Thank you Pdineen03 ( talk) 17:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
This is still going on?! Feel free to remove this S. MarnetteD| Talk 18:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
It would be really great if you could please be more AGF with john's items as to whether they are nonsense or not, I could wordbomb here about the problems that have been discussed at length on mcnabs talk page - it is very easy to judge - but somewhat more problematic (If you are indeed and arabic speaker with knowledge of the middle east, please check me - my original expertise is Indonesia) - than meets the eye - to litter AFD's with 'nonsense' may fulfil some need for your part, but I would be very cautious as to indiscretions by many here on wp - who think they have a valid source - that turns out to be, in many cases complete and utter BS through no fault of their own. salaam. JarrahTree 05:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
I didn't realize the definition of "MVPD" had been removed. I'm not sure if what I did to restore the definition was correct, but it's as good a place as any. The article went through a major overhaul. I had contributed a lot of the content prior to the overhaul but I've pretty much left it alone since then.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Please don't blanket revert thousands of longstanding bytes without discussion first. Most of the notable people without their own Wikipages are notable enough to warrant their own Wikipage. That's the WP:burden. Your understanding of this issue is not correct. Did you happen to see the note left above by the reviewer on my Talk page regarding a new article I created? The standard is that those listed with refs who could warrant their own page qualify to remain in the notable people section, rather than people who already have Wikipages created. But your thinking defies logic, because you're implying that until a Wikipage is created, one is not notable - but a Wikipage cannot be created in the first place unless one is notable. Does that make sense? Castncoot ( talk) 06:14, 2 October 2018 (UTC) Castncoot ( talk) 06:10, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
If you got the energy, there's another bunch of those useless geostubs over at AfD! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 11:21, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
You know, it's almost worth the effort of the cleanup to read your marvellously grumpy Delete votes! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 13:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding what you have done.
Leo1pard (
talk)
11:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits at the Dan O'Keefe page. If you have the interest at some point there is a similar COI tag at Festivus, which would be nice to have removed before December. O'Keefe edited that page quite a bit, but I've had it watchlisted and there doesn't seem to be any major violations but good additions to the concept and history of the topic. Thanks again. Randy Kryn ( talk) 12:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
GAB gab 17:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Awww, thanks, that was very sweet of you!!! :) Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 09:58, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
You may imagine that I would have appreciated it if you'd said that the first time you reverted, instead of just using rollback with no explanation, especially considering that I provided an explanation for my revert and that it was clearly not vandalism. I'm not interested in edit-warring, though. Mr rnddude ( talk) 18:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for my missteps. Thank you for your help with the format. 71.56.169.162 ( talk) 00:54, 28 October 2018 (UTC)