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 25 | ← | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | → | Archive 35 |
Doug: With regard to Articles for Deletion/Van Tuyl you commented: "The publisher of the book in question is "R.L. Van Tuyl, distributor". This clearly fails WP:SPS and should not be used as a source."
The book was published in 1996 and sold out completely that year. It is no longer available for distribution. this was not a commercial plug, but rather a reference to the best - and most authoritatively researched - book on the topic. I cannot see how using this is in any way commercial.
Rory Van Tuyl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rory Van Tuyl ( talk • contribs) 19:01, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about this article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kayaking#Kayak roll article - your comments would be greatly appreciated. Alansplodge ( talk) 16:11, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Although I know that a definitive "close" has become somewhat rare at WP:RSN, would you be willing to make a call on the consensus at Wikipedia:RSN#caic.org.au? I am asking because the source is somewhat widely used, and the various related talk pages are generally inhabited by the same editors (making the same arguments) as have been at the RSN. Thank you for considering it. -- Tgeairn ( talk) 01:34, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gia Bình District. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 01:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug - there is a new editor (anon from Spain) whose interests, syntax etc appears to be very similar to a previous blocked user on this topic. Or perhaps its my imagination. Would appreciate your thoughts or input before I find myself in a tiresome edit war on this page, as I previously have, and I only have a few windows of time for WP at the moment. Cheers Nickm57 ( talk) 02:37, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
See this discussion: [1] - you are mentioned. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 02:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Abraham may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:17, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Theory of the Portuguese discovery of Australia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 11:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
What evidence is that Edomites were enemies of Israel during the 10th century BCE. they may have been subjects. BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The bible states that the Edomites were conquered by King David and were under King Solomon's domination and only broke free after King Solomon's death. So in the 10th century they were under Israeli domination BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The reason I removed the stuff on the copper mine was because it had nothing to do with the copper mine. What these sources refer to is an Egyptian building found there that we have recently discovered had nothing to do with the copper mine BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
A user has recently begun to remove the Lur categories from different articles, i understand that it needs a source, but what about the people with surnames like Bakhtiar (which means Bakhtiarian), i guess that the surname confirms that the person is an Lur/Bakhtiari? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 16:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but i asked Dougweller (an admin), not some editor who removed it. A surname means much plus many of these people were born in places populated by Lurs/Bakhtiaris. But i guess Dougweller can explain. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 16:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Do you think that this [2] is reliable enough? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:40, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dougweller,
I've seen your revert and think that your revert is partly right but still think that you shouldn't have to remove everything there was. Georgian airways, rugby union members and currency indeed uses the Borjgali and it is a reality. However I would welcome your suggestions. GJ. GEORGIANJORJADZE 18:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you revised an edit I made. I can understand the bit about OR I suppose, but what is meant by language we can't use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.149.41 ( talk) 00:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the constructive comments on the Mima Mounds attempt. I have given up writing articles. It was time to quit at 75 while things were still reasonable. This is one reason I wanted this particular matter to end on a positive note. I had only hoped someone else would pick up on a good idea and not let it die. I will not be trying to write to Wikepedia again.
I have not yet given up trying to interest someone else to write an article or do some research, but am getting close to doing so.
Charles M. Hansen 85.80.205.84 ( talk) 09:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dougweller again,
Can you please take on your watch these two articles and put the protection on them for some time? Colchis and Caucasian Iberia are vandalised by one user who removes all the sources all the time without even discussing it. Thanks. GEORGIANJORJADZE 10:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller "HistoryofIran" user vandalism in Lurs and Luristan page. He remove All Historical images and "Lur people of iran" map no valid reason. I ask you to stop doing this "HistoryofIran" user.
/info/en/?search=User:HistoryofIran
/info/en/?search=Lorestan_Province
Thank you Setenlyacc ( talk) 05:36, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Capricorn (astrology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sumerian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:50, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dougweller,
I've added the references and images back in the article and hope you don't mind. Thanks. GEORGIANJORJADZE 21:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, it seems that user who edited that article dont want to discuss this problem and only reverting edits. I have already write him about it, but he ignoring my messages and still reverts edits. Please warm him about it.-- Δαβίδ ( talk) 10:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Could you kindly take a look at User Talk:Premknutsford25, a user you've already warned and I've also issued a final warning, and then note that post-final warning the user has again reverted to their preferred version. I could probably argue that all of my reverts so far have been to enforce policy and thus I'm not WP:INVOLVED, but there's no real reason to stretch the matter. If you prefer, I can take the matter to WP:EWNB for a wholly independent review. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Millions of articles or searches like angelina, abhishek, gomez also have same person listed in the (names) article, as well as the search itself, So are we going to correct them all just like we did on avril? aish.ego ( talk) 10:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Your inflammatory and deliberately bad faith accusations aside, I strongly disagree with your edits as WP:UNDUE. Neil MacGregor of the British Museum himself has stated his view of the cylinder as a declaration of human rights, as have numerous others as the sources indicate, proving your accusations against me to be wrong and defamatory. Criticism of this view should certainly be included, but your version is totally written in the most POV and revisionist manner possible. Laval ( talk) 11:09, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Just so anyone reading my page knows what I said: "At Cyrus Cylinder you removed the sourced text "claimed to be an early "human rights charter", though the British Museum and a number of scholars of the ancient Near Eastern history reject this view as anachronistic [1] and a misunderstanding [2]" and replaced it with "identified by scholars and archaeologists as the oldest known charter of universal human rights." This is a clear violation of WP:NPOV in that it removed sourced text showing a difference of opinion and added material, less well sourced, just showing one point of view.
Your edit summary suggested to other editors that you'd simply added sources, not that you'd removed some and made a major change in the text.
And you've misused your sources. The Guardian article [3] says "The Cyrus cylinder is often called the world's oldest human rights document, but it was common in Mesopotamia for kings to begin their rule with such reform declarations, according to the British Museum." You can't use that to call it the first human rights charter, only to say that it is often called that, and you certainly can't use a statement that denies it's the first human rights charter to say that it is.
The other article uses the word 'reputedly' and says "Museum curator Adamjee says when people call the cylinder a declaration of human rights, they may be reading what they want to see into an artifact with a more prosaic purpose. The cylinder was a foundation deposit, like a time capsule in a cornerstone in a prominent modern building. Adamjee calls it "a very traditional kingship document. The inscriptions mention a particular ruler and his lineage and invite the blessings of the divinities to protect the structure they were building." So, Adamjee says, "it's anachronistic to use 20th century terms to describe events that happened two thousand five hundred years ago." - if you are going to use this as a source, what was your reason for leaving all of this out?
This is hotly disputed issue and your changes removed the dispute and mispresented the sources. Please don't do this again. Dougweller ( talk) 10:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)"
Asd for Neil McGregor, he wrote "It has even been described as the first declaration of human rights, and while this was never the intention of the document -- the modern concept of human rights scarcely existed in the ancient world -- it has come to embody the hopes and aspirations of many." Dougweller ( talk) 12:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Doug, an array of single edit socks seem keen on inserting the same first person account here. Appears to be copyvio, but I can't seem to find a source, could you possibly take some action here? As I've reverted something that's not an obvious copyvio, I'm not going to do it. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 13:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Just saw your block of RealTimeLords1. Please also see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Callump90 for further background on this user. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 17:55, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug,
As an editor with a long involvement in the Stonehenge article I would value your input on the latest content disagreement. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ( Talk Contribs) 06:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " List of species rumored/believed to still be alive". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! -- Guy Macon ( talk) 13:58, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug, sorry to drag all this up again. I've just reverted this edit to Patricia Cloherty removing a reliably sourced claim that the subject received an award from Putin. Apparently a source confirming she received the award "does not relate" to a claim in the article that she received the award. But I've also just noted this edit to a related article making a claim about the same person, sourced to the same unreliable source as last time ("COPI"). Even if it were determined to have been a reliable source, surely it's a WP:PRIMARY source and shouldn't be used for statements like that. From what I can see, one opposing lawyer has suggested that her testimony was contradictory. That allegation is now being used in our article as a source to support an apparent statement of fact. I've taken this to ANI and you were the only one who bothered to look at it. I don't want to get into an edit war on yet another article. Any chance you could take a look? Cheers, Stalwart 111 22:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Dear Dougweller, Im edited the article in my User:Vahram Mekhitarian/Armenian Eternity sign page and think that correct. Can I move the content of my userpage in to the main article Armenian Eternity sign? Vahram Mekhitarian ( talk) 23:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to say - seams you do a good job. Always stay this fair and neutral regards Ginosti ( talk) 03:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Doug, there's a new wikiproject created WP:WikiProject Mirza and all bios that have the name Mirza in them are being added to it. The scope of the WP and the Mirza article seem to indicate that this is some weird synthesis, apparently like having a WikiProject Smith and tagging articles to it. Not really sure what to do in this case, I came across it after a repeatedly deleted article on my watchlist sprouted up again and was tagged with this. Can you or one of your able watchlisters take a look at this? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 05:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Should the long list of relatives in the infobox be there? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Flanders - Zananiri ( talk) 15:24, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
This user just does'nt talk. Inspite of numerous SPI's, warnings still he is silent. He reverted your helpful messages. What can we do with him? Sohambanerjee1998 11:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Can you revdel something if I email you the diff? - Sitush ( talk) 10:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your message Doug.
Apologies for breaking the rules. As someone who is new to wikipedia the references you posted are very useful. I'll have a thorough read before adding to any more articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shorinjikempo ( talk • contribs) 15:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Zheng He may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humor. Best wishes. Diego ( talk) 16:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
You have a weird definition of "edit war" if you think I'm doing it. Edit war means "reverting", but I'm not reverting - I'm trying new content with each edit, each time trying to address the points raised by the people who reverted (who are different each time, BTW). You'll notice that
WP:EDITCONSENSUS is policy, and that both
WP:BRD and
WP:REVERT recommend using reverts as a last resort.
Diego (
talk) 16:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, that user added the same text agein. I dont want to revert his edits, please warm him.-- Δαβίδ ( talk) 17:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
The page that you are referring to is from a website of Indian government which are in public domain. And they are essentially provisions in constitution/law and therefore re-rendering might not be good. Aravind V R ( talk) 14:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm a bit, (underestimate), short for time for the next few weeks due to life pressures, Doug, but I certainly would like to revise this article. I thought I'd try to start a CE and revision tonight, but it has all sorts of problems (sourcing, insufficient clarity over the Sheba/Sabaean people nexus, failure to distinguish early from late traditions, etc.etc.) and it began to look like a headache requiring a few days at least, which I don't have at the moment. Could you be so kind as to keep my promise on the backboiler and give me a nudge if I don't get to do some overhauling there within the next month or so? I tend to forget a lot of things like this. Cheers. Nishidani ( talk) 20:05, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, please take some action about that article or deletion discussion. I removed that content but administrator said that such issues should be addressed to you.-- Δαβίδ ( talk) 18:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. Would it be possible for you to check for an OTRS ticket for this image obtained from this photo at http://www.pooppeepuke.com/. It has been marked as pending since February. Thanks. — CactusWriter (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
There is an ongoing edit war with (I presume) an ISP with a dynamic address here, who wants to give what I & another editor feel is undue prominence to a fringe view here, although one promoted by an otherwise respectable scholar. In his first incarnation he added to the main article Camuliana which is fair enough. But here it is too prominent for a view with no other academic support. I'd be grateful if you could take a look. Cheers, Johnbod ( talk) 21:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
If you read my message correctly, you'll notice I didn't call him a vandal, just his actions, and his actions are vandalism. I included four reliable secondary sources to an undisputed fact that was previously (and still is) unattributed, and he went on to revert my entire edit and removed said sources, which is also information suppression. If he had acted in the correct manner, he would have simply reformulated the sentence and left the sources. He did not. The assertion that I attributed with four reliable secondary sources is not in dispute, only the way I have formulated the sentence is in dispute. Thus, he should have changed the sentence, but not delete the sources.-- Kobayashi245 ( talk) 10:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings Dougweller. Thank you for your note. Yep, but you beat me to the revert that really mattered... At least it saved me a journey to ARV. Cheers! -- Technopat ( talk) 15:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Azerbaijani nationalist(s) using various IPs are warring to have modern Azerbaijani name included on Nader Shah, Shah of Iran. Nader was Turkic, but he came from North-East Iran and there's no evidence he spoke Azerbaijani. He certainly didn't use the modern Azeri script. Semi-protect? -- Folantin ( talk) 13:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Re: the Buddhakahika SPI, it's no good blaming the bot. Some might say that a good workman never blames his tools but I'll just point you to the first sentence of this section. - Sitush ( talk) 15:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC) (make sure I sign this one!)
Dougweller - regarding reverting the recent Phoenicia edit with quotes from Rawlinson and Urquhart, I agree perhaps quotes are long, and perhaps you can help edit for brevity. But the fact they are old is relevant and expected given the long view of Phoenician History. Most Phoenician full histories were written in the nineteenth century.. kenrick, Rawlinson,Movers, etc.. Most recent contributions (Baumgarten, Moscati) have been focused on specific subjects (Sanconiathon, cultural heritage) and less comprehensive. I am interested in your view, but would like to keep some portion of the quotes of historians well versed in the subject. - Thx again for your interest and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabujawdeh ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I certainly am not looking to get blocked from editing, but I am genuinely confused as to how this became such an issue. I added Major League Baseball Hall of Famer Buck Ewing to the 1906 Death section as he died on the 6th of October that year. He is being removed, first by DerbyCountyinNZ, and now you. There is no anger on my part, so there will be no cursing from me or reason to block me. There are literally hundreds of other hall of famers listed in the death sections of pages. Why is this ONE individual not being allowed to remain? You talk about adding everyone with an article would overload the page. There are more entries in the death entries of one month in 2013 than there are for the entire year of 1906, so I fail to see how overloading can be an issue. This individual is a Hall of Famer, not some cashier at a local market. I've seen dozens of entries for baseball players with very little credentials listed in the death pages. If he is to be removed for insignificance or overloading, then he should be the first of many removed. He IS significant and his continued removal seems overly nitpicky for such a small entry. I ask that the man's entry be allowed to remain as it shows respect for his accomplishments in baseball and, quite frankly, the reasons given for its removal seem trivial. Twinsdude ( talk) 06:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I have mentioned at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3/Workshop a request for some sort of rough draft of rough guidelines for religion. I believe you have participated in previous attempts regarding this matter, and I believe that your input on why you thought such guidelines were needed, and possibly why you believe they still are, would be very welcome and useful, as well as, of course, any input you might have on any of the other proposals. John Carter ( talk) 15:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this page, the lead is under siege again, first by a IP and the from a first time editor. -- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 17:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I work with John. The term may be 60 years old. If it is, we can get rid of the reference to Simcha Jacobovici coining it but recently there’s been a specific controversy relating to its use in Israel. I don’t see why you should censor the reference to Professor Goren and Dr. Deutsch, nor do I see why there shouldn’t be any links to the various articles – pro and con – relating to this issue. Are you trying to make the entry more accurate? Or are you trying to censor the debate? Also, I note your aggressive tone and don’t understand it. ( Naustin1980 ( talk) 18:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC))
I just reposted taking your comments into consideration. I changed Simcha Jacobovici "coining" the term to "reintroducing" the term. I also made reference to the controversy breaking out in Israel. As far as I can see, there are no living persons issues. We quote Professor Goren and make absolutely no comments about him. Similarly, we quote Dr. Deutsch. That's all. You've taken out all references to Simcha Jacobovici's blog. By doing so, all you've done is tell one side of the story. It seems that you may be determined to censor this debate and I don't understand why the "free encyclopedia" would want to stop people from knowing that a debate is going on. In recent times, Jacobovici has blogged in the Times of Israel and on his own site. Several members of Tel Aviv University have written a response. Biblical Archaeology Review has published an ad and written an editorial. This issue has involved literally thousands of people and hundreds of academics. The post is fair and balanced and simply refers people to the various opinions. I hope you let people make up their own minds.
( Naustin1980 ( talk) 21:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC))
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, I've picked you at random for your expertise and I was hoping to get your advice (but not your direct intervention, as that might be forum shopping). In mid-August I removed some text at The Big Bang Theory because it struck me as WP:SYNTHESIS, as the text attempted to conclude something that was not explicitly stated in its sources, and the only sources were cherrypicked positive reviews that supported the summary. It was weirdly circular. Basically, "Critics started liking the series as time went on. 'I liked this season' said a critic."
A semi-retired user reverted my edit, but didn't explain how it was not synthesis. I've attempted to discuss on the talk page, but the user didn't give me a clear explanation. I attempted to discuss on his talk page, but I still didn't get a clear explanation. I've twice attempted to invite people from WikiProject Television [4] [5] to tepid response, and I've opened an RfC [6], but I've gotten poor response and non-committal answers. What's a next reasonable step? I really want to get this off my plate. Seems silly that something that seems like such a no-brainer to me could be stone-walled like this. I only have two people who sort-of agree with me, can I make my change yet or do I have to wait for more input? Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I am looking for something very much like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Timeline_of_human_prehistory . I'd like to add Things from E.O. Wilson's Social Conquest of Earth and notes about various genes, like fox2p that many believe strongly correlates with language development, etc, etc*0.5. The user Das Baz, aka Erudil seems to have disappeared.
I'm more interested in the timeline that the "main articles", so, is it legit to just add stuff to the timeline? You can send me to the Teahouse or other, but, you have so many entries on the talk page, I thought I would ask you first. Bodysurfinyon ( talk) 15:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Even if the world is mean, this kitten still doesn't care cause that's what cats are like. Anyway, you're a fine editor and admin and usually a voice of reason, and I appreciate it.
Drmies (
talk) 17:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Edit by you, [9] i would like to say that one of the line in the same page reads "English writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1885), writing under...", another one is "At least one early Christian writer, Basil of Caesarea (329–379)".. so it's not like writers are not accepted for the page. I would like to add some more suggestion, that supports the similar theory, this one by Science historian [10], Helaine Selin. Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 13:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
"One finds in Veda intelligent speculations about the genesis of the universe from non-existence, the configuration of the universe, the spherical self supporting earth, and the year of 360 days divided into 12 equal parts of 30 days each with a periodical intercalary month. In the Aitareya Brahmana, we read of the moon's monthly elongation and the cause of day and night."(ref)
---Medieval India---
Scientists such as Aryabhatta, Bhaskara, Makkibhatta, Brahmagupta, Varahmihira and others had also wrote about Earth's spherical form, and it's revolving, besides measuring it's diameter in a greatly precise way for their time. [12]
This one is done, now another topic, similar though, the page Spherical Earth, i just checked it's full history, and it's obvious that you have been active big time. The page included the book by Helaine Selin as source, mentioned above, as well as other sources. Although the source of Selin became unavailable, it couldn't be verified, thus it was removed. So what you think now, about this version [13] or [14]. I think the similar version regarding "India" as well as lead paragraph can be brought back. Because "Early Astronomy and Cosmology" doesn't seem to be available, nor there's any 2nd source other than this wikipedia page which would confirm that it's talking about Rigveda. "Early+Astronomy+and+Cosmology"+page+68&rlz=1C1GGGE_enIN421&es_sm=93&ei=wPFSUqf7KsqUrAflnID4Aw&start=20&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=679&dpr=1. Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 17:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
You have repeatedly deleted the Torman page of your own accord without any consultation with administration, the page is completely referenced, i will continually reinstate the page until you take it to Admin and propose it for deletion,,if after consensus it is agreed that the page should be deleted i will not reinstate the page-- Prograce ( talk) 15:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
You are deleting pages without making any credible argument,, calling it a hoax of your own accord is not acceptable,,it is completely sourced,, if you have a problem take it to admin-- Prograce ( talk) 15:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
All articles created by this sock puppet have been deleted either by me or another Administrator, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prestigiouzman/Archive. Dougweller ( talk) 10:21, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Doug, the Bulldozer archaeology page is the product of two of Simcha's paid employees, for the purposes of defaming Prof. Yuval Goren. They're obviously new to WP, and are just trying to legitimize the claims against Goren by self-citing. -- XKV8R ( talk) 18:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi - I apologize in advance if this is an inappropriate request and constitutes canvassing, however, I was hoping to engage you in informal dispute resolution on a WP:CIVIL issue in a two-editor thread that appears not to be self-resolving. For full disclosure, I'd previously made a request of User:OrangeMike, but I believe he's offline now. I chose you at random to request informal dispute resolution as a precursor to RfC/U (if necessary), if you have a few minutes available (I certainly understand if you do not). I've posted a brief summary below and I'm certain the other involved editor will shortly provide his perspective, as well.
Background: The entry Ronan Farrow has recently been heavily edited through insertion of promotional language by a large number of single-purpose sockpuppets. A seven-identity sock was recently uncovered and banned. The two remaining editors, myself and Tenebrae, had been engaged in a cooperative process of resolving much of the promotional language that had been inserted in the article, but came to a disagreement on one sentence. I believed the source of our disagreement to be grammatical in nature. Tenebrae believed the source of our disagreement was content-based and thought my suggested edit constituted POV insertion. Since there were only two active editors, and to resolve this impasse, I posted a RfC. Unfortunately, the RfC has become - I believe - derailed through aggressive name-calling by Tenebrae who - prior to the RfC - had been extremely gregarious and civil. Specifically, in the last 24 hours:
Attempted Resolutions to Date: I requested, seven times, not to be name-called, however, this has not helped resolve the situation and I believe the inundation of personal attacks is scaring away other editors from commenting on the RfC. After all of the above were posted, I told Tenebrae I would not engage with him further until he "calmed down a little." This has also not helped resolve the situation. At this point there are only 2 confirmed editors participating in the RfC - Tenebrae and myself - and a single IP editor has posted his first comment ever to WP in this thread as well, though dealing with the RfC and not the User Conduct question. (For full disclosure, I have expressed a sense of reserved skepticism about a first-time IP editor appearing in a lightly-trafficked, but sock-heavy, thread almost immediately after the RfC was opened.)
Other Factors: Separate from this issue, I posted two quotes from Tenebrae (about me) in my userspace as part of page decor/personalization. Tenebrae told me he was offended and requested I remove them. I apologized and stated I would remove them, though Tenebrae edited my userspace himself before I could (which I don't have a problem with as I had planned on editing it anyway). This occurred following the spate of name-calling and it was not my intent to offend Tenebrae, but I acknowledge it had that effect and take ownership for using his content in my userspace.
Tenebrae is a user with a long-history of achievements on WP; certainly a history that eclipses my own. I am convinced of his maturity and goodwill. At the present time, we're - however - unable to move forward with actual edits as we are the only two editors and the RfC has descended into one party name-calling the other and making accusations of poor faith, and the other editor simply repeating requests not to be subjected to name-calling and accusations of poor faith. No content dialog is occurring. Thank you for any counsel you can provide to us. BlueSalix ( talk) 20:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Bulldozer Archaeology". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 15 October 2013.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee. 01:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller,
I'm delighted with the sanitation undertaken by you in the Haplogroup I-M438 article. A certain user (no names mentioned) had been formerly very stubborn in maintaining the unreliable sources in question. Part of them (namely Kenneth Nordvedt) have now also been introduced by other Slav nationalists in the genetics section of the Croats article. Could you consider kicking the hornet's nest and clean out the pseudo-science once and for all? Praxis Icosahedron ϡ ( TALK) 04:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for catching my reversion to prior vandalism. I usually try to keep that possibility in mind or at least glance at the finished product as a double check. I am afraid that even after having become aware of the problem some time ago, I have missed this a few times (out of many). I know we need to strive for no mistakes rather than a very few. I think biography articles may be somewhat more susceptible to multiple vandalisms within a short period of time if the person is living and has some "anti-fans" for lack of a better word. It seems I just missed it this time. A reminder is good to have on such occasions. Donner60 ( talk) 06:29, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
I am still waiting for a GOOD reason as to why Buck Ewing's death is not allowed in the 1906 death section. Every other MLB Hall of Fame player is listed in their respective years. It seems unbelievably unfair that I could be blocked because I strongly believe he should be listed as well and am therefore persistent. This issue defies logic and reason. I imagine you laughing and enjoying messing with me over this. It almost seems personal, because it absolutely makes no sense that ANYONE should have a problem with Ewing's inclusion. So, without threatening to block me again, can we have a discussion on the topic?
Have you bought up JohnEUnited, Naustin1980, and Michelle d74 to SPI? If you haven't already, I will. It seems pretty blatant to me, due to the edits at Bulldozer archaeology. Apologies if you have, I had an emergency come up and haven't been able to really keep up. -- TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 02:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Trust that no one feels like they're under any pressure; it's upsetting that he feels the need to present Wikipedia in that light, but no one will make concessions to him just because he runs a blog. After all, I blog about Wikipedia too and my opinion carries no more clout than anyone else's. -- TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 23:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have to ask you to strike the libellous comment you made about me on the talk page of Daniel Case. In the section IP at Nina Rosenwald, you said "This IP is pretty obviously and openly anti-Muslim." You make this remark in reference to me, the only IP actively editing that page. I am not anti-Muslim and you have no basis for making such a claim. Your remark is offensive and untrue. Please strike through it. As an admin, you should know better. -- 72.66.30.115 ( talk) 15:17, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Using the term "libel" practically constitutes a legal threat under these circumstances. However, it cannot be libel, as an IP address cannot have a reputation to be defamed. It has to be a specifically identifiable person whose identity is public. In this case your identity remains unknown; being called anti-Muslim on the basis of online statements attached to only an IP address which for all we know may not even be uniquely yours, or even if it is may still be used by others, cannot possibly cause you any real-life harm that you could be compensated for. Doug doesn't even have to make the usual distinction between stating that it's his opinion and stating it as fact (if, indeed, it can be factually proven or disproven to the sastisfaction of a court that someone is prejudiced).
So, the short of it is that while I should at least warn you over the legal threat, I won't because it's a transparently empty one. Daniel Case ( talk) 19:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Already did, thanks. Daniel Case ( talk) 05:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
It seems as though discussions about this BLP may have gone out of hand. I feel like I'm in the wrong for accepting this article in the first place. Was I really? Because I feel like I was. :/ -- t numbermaniac c 12:33, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Bulldozer Archaeology, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
User:Sunray (
talk) 16:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Per your offer at Talk:Islamophobic incidents, please do your magic with Twinkle! Thanks!. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
What do you think should be done about Loomspicker? I've already raised the issue at AN, but nothing was done since he oh-so-conveniently went inactive for a few days. He's clearly a single-purpose account with the agenda of scrubbing the encyclopedia of a word he dislikes, but what, in your opinion, is the best course of action? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 16:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
An IP has just posted on WP:AN regarding this article - you seem to be involved. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug. I know you're interested in the David article. Have you seen this new book by Joel Baden? It's interesting that a figure deemed unhistorical is treated as "the historical David" by a Yale professor. A quick skim indicates the historical record is the Bible. Wish I had time to read this book right now. Maybe you do? Regards, Yopienso ( talk) 17:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm beating myself with hysop to make amends. Enjoy... Haploidavey ( talk) 10:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
This person is edit warring on Satire - predictably, the problem is the word Islamophobia - I have tried to engage in discussion but (surprise surprise) s/he has nothing constructive to say. getting tired, but I don't want to give up... -- Soundofmusicals ( talk) 10:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
By "C&P" I meant "copy and paste." Most of those Serer religion articles' additional reading sections list the same authors, or are just repetitions of things that already appear in the references, and frequently both. These articles are so jacked that there's no way they can be fixed without a total rewrite and access to all of the texts cited, but I don't think that an article that is only half about the Serer religion should have that bloat. Eladynnus ( talk) 14:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
There have been repeated attempts by this user to change the term "Maratha Empire" to "kingdom." I will assume this change is out of ignorance and not page-based sabotage. Therefore, I have provided you with an exhaustive list below of all primary sources that state Emperor Shivaji founded the "Maratha Empire" (not a "kingdom" as you so quaintly put it) in 1674 (note: these sources include both WASP "Westerners" and "Indians", so both perspectives deem the Maratha Empire an "empire" and not a "kingdom"):
Kincaid, D. (1937). The Grand Rebel: An Impression of Shivaji, Founder of the Maratha Empire. Collins. Talwalker, C. (1996). Shivaji's Army and Other “Natives” in Bombay. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 16(2), 114-122. Cooper, R. G. (2003). The anglo-maratha campaigns and the contest for india: the struggle for control of the south asian military economy. Cambridge University Press. Kincaid, C. A., & lavanta Pārasnīsa, D. B. (1986). Comprehensive History of the Maratha Empire. Anmol Publications. Nadkarnia, R. V. (1966). The Rise and Fall of the Maratha Empire. Bombay: Popular Prakashan. Takakhav, N. S. (1921). Life of Shivaji Maharaj: Founder of the maratha empire. Ranade, M. G. (1900). Rise of the Maratha power (Vol. 1). Punalekar & Company. Sardesai, H. S. (2002). Shivaji, the great Maratha (Vol. 1). Genesis Publishing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.181.166.191 ( talk) 05:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the wrong SPI complaint. I did that because this page has been under constant attack by sock puppets. The case against him is more than 3 years old and has no progress because there is no substance. Enough evidence has been given in the court and some of the accusers themselves have been convicted of charges. Unfortunately the media doesn't report this. The way the section is written now looks like a charge sheet more than a wiki article and is an attempt to defame rather than report. In fact the courts and media bodies have warned media of abusive reporting in this case. So relying on media reports too much for negative information is not right.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acnaren ( talk • contribs) 09:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
I just saw your edit, I think, that summary explains the point itself. It may just need a better explanation. Justicejayant ( talk) 10:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
The page contains highly WP:Fringe, Once I made changes into this page, a user "Blackguard_SF"(he has to do nothing with this page nor he discussed anywhere) reverted them, claiming "written like essay", after that, I started re-wording the article so my edits were reverted by Saddhiyama. When I asked for the explanation from Saddhiyama, I actually agreed with a few edits, but this user wants complete removal of all sourced materials that I added, by claiming like "you copied this from old history of wikipedia pages", " [17] is a dead link", and a lot of more childish explanations which has to do nothing with the sourced content or confirm that i coypasted the article. After I took this issue to DRN, this user failed to provide even a single valid argument, and kept telling the same fairy tales like "I forgot which article it was", "Don't know where u copy pasted from, but you copy pasted"... [18]
It seems more like, that the user is assuming Bad faith only for causing trouble. Because if these 2 users assume good faith, they would be thinking of making the page better instead of removing all reliably sourced materials and bringing back to Fringed and unsourced version. I want to make this page a lot better, but these with these 2, i can't. You should contribute here. Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 10:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Could you please take a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Kuba_rugs_and_carpets&action=history -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 18:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Please? and by the way this looks like copyvio and is also unsourced [19] -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 15:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if i am spamming you but could you please take a look here [20] and here [21], thanks. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 17:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Excavation (archaeology) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Llanos de Moxos may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Excavation (archaeology) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Unknown years of Jesus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 08:57, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ali-Shir Nava'i may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 09:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that User:Bless sins had changed the wording in the
Seljuq dynasty article.
[22]
The original text read:
The changed text reads:
My concern is whether this change is plagiarism. This the what the Michael Adas source states;
What are your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Rough consensus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Based on this, I think you may be interested in this: [23] Montanabw (talk) 00:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Akhenaten, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dana boomer ( talk) 17:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
I created a new subpage in your userspace and revised the links so they pertain to you instead of Elockid. Hope you don't mind. [24] You might want to create a new stats page. -- NeilN talk to me 21:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
User:Urməvi and User:HistoryofIran have both been notified of AA2 editing restrictions and juding from the editwarring by the cooresponding IP, I would suspect that is User:Urməvi logged out. [26] -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 04:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
It's a tricky one. The articles are technically OK, although some of the refs may be a bit iffy. I deleted the software article because I couldn't even see a claim for notability, another article has been sent to AFD by someone else. I can't see how Teenfav in its current form can be AFDed. It's got references, not overtly promo and I imagine the viewing figures make it notable. Interestingly, one of her edits was a comment about the promotional nature of a law firm article on its talk page, which led me to delete said article. One to watch, as you say Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
As Wiki advises I began discussing this in the talk page. You have made no attempt to engage me in the talk section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.61.142 ( talk) 09:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Check the recent history. I think the problem with the paragraph is now fully resolved, but this shows how important it is to laboriously dig through the history instead of just reverting the most recent suspicious-looking edit: you have bad edit after bad edit. Especially India-related articles are a mess.
This is why I wish we would implement a simple but radical solution, such as protecting vulnerable articles from IP editing altogether. It's just too much work to vet all these edits, and so nothing gets done, such as actually working on the articles. Instead, they degrade further and further. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 22:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, would you mind my asking your opinion? Is there anything I should be apologising or making amends for in relation to the exchanges here User_talk:Astynax#Inappropriate_remarks, here User_talk:Dkriegls#Inappropriate_remarks, and here Talk:List_of_new_religious_movements#Definiton_of_NRM.2C_or_lack_of_it? Thanks. DaveApter ( talk) 15:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:No paid advocacy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I want to notify you that Turgeis keeps editing government types as User:Izraías and as User:-Ilhador- ( block log). I've just cleaned up his mess. -- Omnipaedista ( talk) 14:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Majority part of most of the copied text was written by me, so I don't think the article should be deleted on the grounds of Copyvio. Even then, if I give credit to those articles, can it be restored? The parts which exists elsewhere are the sections of Decline and Rama. Rahul Jain ( talk) 06:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
It would take me forever to sort it out and Risker agrees that it had to be deleted. You need to recreate it from scratch - you've got a copy in your sandbox, right? Which is again copyvio but I've left it there to be worked on. My guess, given what Risker says at [User talk:Risker]] is that you may need to revise it anyway. Dougweller ( talk) 06:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Because you obviously don't have enough to do as is ;), I would be interested in any comments you might have on the talk page of the above article regarding the revisions of an editor who has admitted being an adherent of the school (which is why he has proposed them) and my own input regarding what seems to me to be the problem of deciding what content best goes where, and how to deal with that concern. John Carter ( talk) 15:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
... my post at RP's talk page. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 03:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
You stated: "I'm afraid it's still WP:Plagiarism - and there is a serious problem of how you are going to meet WP:VERIFY. "I note that you've confused Sadashiv Ambadas Dange, the academic, with Shripad Amrit Dange one of the founders of the CPI", and even if you straighten that out you don't have a source for the statement. You'd do better by trying to get the blog out of your mind entirely and starting a new article finding your own "
Hi I have not confused Sadashiv Ambadas Dange with Shripad Amrit Dange the founder of CPI. It was Comrade Dange (Shripad Amrit Dange) as he was known who availed his press to publish several of Vasudeo Sitaram Bendrey's books. This fact is corroborated in the videos I had posted from eminent Marathi historians such as Ninad Gangadhar Bedekar and Shri Babasaheb Purandare. But these are in Marathi. I plan to rewrite the article because, I did have the blog site holder release all the articles to the public domain but I guess it is not enough. All the articles and video references about Vasudeo Sitaram Bendrey are in Marathi which makes it equally tough to verify for one who does not know Marathi. Is there a way for me to get a reviewer that knows Marathi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaitanya.Errande ( talk • contribs) 21:21, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Nyttend ( talk) 22:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Dougweller, the user Δαβίδ deliberately removes my contributions without reason, contributions non structural, changed a meaning of article. He does not understand what is the Armenian Eternity sign, confused with other symbols, such as Borjgali, and removes the unique photographs of examples of Armenian Eternity sign from Gallery. He also removes entries on the talk page, which is unacceptable. By its non constructive actions, he interferes with the work of other editors. Please warn this user did not remove my editions, and not doing what he do not understand. Vahram Mekhitarian ( talk) 22:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation/Malplaced disambiguation pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
BJP has leaders and politicians from all religions. Stop labeling and calling names it blindly like a paid journalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniash007 ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug, I appreciate your offer to step in if I wanted to let you know about that anon IP adding questionable edits to music pages. It's still going on, just not on the same scale as before. Two articles on 22 October, one on 23 October, all on music pages. The first two were just more of the uncited personnel listings; the one on 23 October was the vandalism that the IP in question had added about 10 times before to that same page ( Sad Eyes). Still no response from that IP - 107.215.236.170
Rockypedia ( talk) 05:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 15:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello!
As you have commented in the past on List of new religious movements, I'm asking you to take a look at the recent activity on the article and the talk page. It seems that some are unhappy with the RfC and are rather attached to a particular outcome. I'm backing off (again) from trying to clean this up (as I don't need to get into an EW over it :/ ), but I do think that an extra set of eyes (and possibly a stern comment) would make a world of difference.Thanks for considering it, cheers! -- Tgeairn ( talk) 20:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/2013 review. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You advised me to go to a talk page to discuss problems with an edit I was making rather than getting into a reverting war. I tried, but was ignored. Not only was my edit undone, but now I see that many of my edits have been undone. I can only assume by you or the other individual who had a problem with me in the first place.
It is this kind of pettiness that is the ONLY reason I do not make financial contributions to Wikipedia when asked to do so. My edits were harmless. But others with power complexes seem to enjoy ruling the Wiki universe with Nazi-like authority. You all win. I give up. I have neither the time nor conviction to press my issues. I wish you all the best. See you on the other side. Twinsdude ( talk) 03:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Just saw your edit at Saraswati. I don't really know where and when did it came, even though I have this page as watchlist. I would like to ask, how it's a copyvio? Did the guy copied from some website, or book? Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 00:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 20:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I have reason to believe that the article located at Kaijudo was deleted in error. The article was about a collectible card game which ties into Kaijudo (TV series). That article links to Kaijudo at the top as a disambiguation link and near the bottom as a Main Article link, so Kaijudo definitely wasn't orphaned. If the collectible card game isn't notable enough to have an article, then the disambiguation isn't needed and the TV series article should be moved to Kaijudo. Digifiend ( talk) 20:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with the article. I will add sources to the contents.
From time to time I seach Wikipedia for violations of WP:CIRCULAR (genuine citogenesis). Usually I search for three phrases: Hephaestus Books (a publisher making books from Wikipedia articles), ...for Smartphones and Mobile Devices, and MobileReference. I recently deleted all the circular citations that include Hephaestus Books and Encyclopedia for Smartphones and Mobile Devices. I guess I will have to do the same for MobileReference when I get the time. But I have some questions. Why isn't this kind of external links blacklisted. Does anyone pay attention to such policy violations? Are there any other publishers making books from Wikipedia articles besides the ones I know? -- Omnipaedista ( talk) 13:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Babur_and_Ali-Shir_Nava.27i. Now User:Nataev is accusing me of vandalism and is claiming that his version is a "modified intro based on other editors' suggestions". -- Lysozym ( talk) 17:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I can see that this wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atif_Ali_Khan has been created by employing services of worker.
See for this contractor goo.gl/oqG6EA (Please add http:// in front of URL)
See for job posting on goo.gl/MpLkgJ (Please add http:// in front of URL)
All references are not notable and clearly seems to be from blogs that are used to highlight person. Image used on page is sought to be own work however this picture could not be accepted as per wiki terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.178.100.18 ( talk) 03:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Dougweller,
With due respect to Wikipedia Culture, I would like to maintain is as follows:
1) Refer to your reversion of Line 41 Edit by me in the article on Shivaji:
Shahaji, father of Shivaji was a Warrior and had sizeable army under his command, is quite general and the citation supporting as Shahaji being "Leader of a band of Mercenary" seems prejudicial.
The meaning of Mercenary is a person who participates in any conflict for monetary or pecuniary gains. I beg to differ that, this was never a case in respect of Shahaji.
Although, he was warred under various Islami Sultans of his era, I demand explanation as to why the case is made in the main article devoted to Shahaji Bhosale, which is similar to my edit.
Please visit his wiki at /info/en/?search=Shahaji_Bhosale. .
In this article, it is mentioned that, Shahaji was a Maratha General and not a single word calling him a Mercenary Leader.
My objection is related to calling Shahaji a Mercenary, which in good faith policy of Wiki is quite misleading and not serving the purpose for which the Wikipedia is being built to impart non-prejudicial knowledge. However, I shall come up with strong citation to support my objection.
2) In case of reversion of Line 162 Edit: no issues as Senapat and Senapati are one and the same.
3) In case of reversion of Line 190 Edit: no issues as Guerilla Warfare is bracketed under sub-Article Military on bullet 8.
4) In case of reversion of Line 211 Edit: no issues as Kanhoji Angre is being written as Kanauji.
Although new, please inform me about any mistakes I may have made, however note that, I intend no vandalism here. (PS: I read the article Wikilawyering (Humour).
Kindly take note of above, and it is urged in good faith, to consider my explanation in true Wikipedian Sense.
Regards, Ricky141 ( talk) 06:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 29102013, Pune MH India.
Ricky141 ( talk) 12:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks a lot.. Dougweller.. Happy Diwali from Pune MH India.. Ricky141 ( talk) 13:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC) |
...to your email. JamesBWatson ( talk) 13:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me Sir. I'm writing in connection with the List of Christian films, in which you reverted my last edit of an up-coming movie. I want to know why please:
Thanks in advance. Peace.-- Goose friend ( talk) 20:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi again dear wikifellow
After reporting user:Urməvi, Seraphimblade blocked him indefinitely. Therefore, I have started looking for sources to verify and, hopefully, expand the Afshar article. You might take what viable information there is in the Avshar article and merge it with the Afshar article, unless you believe that would be an issue later. What information I can not find sources for will be removed from the article page and placed on the talk page. Let me know what you think. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Doug, I have copied the information from the Avshar article and placed it in the Afshar talk page. You can delete the Avshar article whenever you want. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
OMG I love your halloween navbar. Can I copy it? (and adjust slightly) Is this yours or something one can get generally somewhere?-- 🍺 Antiqueight confer 14:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
🍺 Antiqueight confer 16:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Turns out Elockid already has a Christmas themed navbar ready and waiting - when the time comes I shall be asking him if that's ok to steal too.. Faster than digging out the icons and creating from scratch. I'm not American so there won't be a thanksgiving version. Maybe if I start now I can get a jump on February and March! Though I suspect Elockid is the one to go to for cool themes! I may have to come up with non holiday versions instead...-- 🍺 Antiqueight confer 10:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Best practice guidelines for Public Relations professionals. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
et·y·mol·o·gy ˌetəˈmäləjē/ noun noun: etymology
1. the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history. the origin of a word and the historical development of its meaning. plural noun: etymologies synonyms: derivation, word history, development, origin, source More "the etymology of a word may be unknown"
That what I was attempting to do show the evolution of the usage of the word within the Jewish culture. What was there was untrue unreferenced legitimately, and sub-par to put it charitably. The evidence shows the 1936 Tarbiz article to be outdated and unimportant and barely read in 1936 to begin with. What Josephus called Ashkenaz, on a page about a Jewish historical word, is part of the scholarly method for dissecting a Jewish concept.
Theological bestsellers such as the 2 Christian Evangelical books, deserve a mention in their context, noting how they use the Jewish word, just as an antisemitic racial theory is mentioned, so to an Evangelical usage in proven non-Fiction bestseller form deserves a mention, as I did.
I completely disagree with your statements about my edit. But would like to inquire if I tighten it up, provide clearer sources, and remove the word for word quote from the JE, is how much I care about getting the true history put in the article? Providing precise referenced quotes, would you delete it then? Such as.. Josephus about Ashkenaz, Rashi said this here, Saint Jerome stated such here, and so on with ref brackets for each one with a link to a book and page number where these giants of Jewish history used the term and how they used it, and when, and a scant scholarly interpretation, to glue it together. How can that not be construed as an enhancement to the article? When all you have now is very selective quotation and lack of inclusiveness to the point of dictatorship level censorship.
I did not invent out of thin air the connection to Galatia, for example, Christian authors from as early as fourth Century had, the same can not be said for what was there. Kirk loganewski ( talk) 05:47, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Second major information for you. Information is now about senior wikipedian, This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BiH. He is one of spammer who spam wikipedia by creating spam pages. One of his example is Carter Hargrave which is paid. All of created pages are paid. He is smart and knows wikipedia very well, he add references and external links from clients there to wiki. He do some usual wikipedia stuff as well in between so that you can catch him. Please check his completed jobs on freelancing website (Link provided). Another spammy caught. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.178.100.18 ( talk) 12:11, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Update Update, Update (Save wiki from senior wiki spammers) This user has multiple user accounts, he is involved in deletion of controversies content from Hydroxycut and that was paid too. He changes in such a way that no one can realize it. Check his strange activities on following pages (All paid)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxycut (30 March 2013) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_Hotline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HireJungle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veeam
He challenges that no one is Better than him on wiki, no one has ever caught and no one will. Check that these are non-notable website with poor references. Your Senior Patroller is patrolling his pocket from wikipedia. A successful spammer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.248.35.13 ( talk) 04:26, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, can you help me improve this article, thank you: Heide (sect).-- CanaryIslands ( talk) 20:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Your edit to Template:Indo-European topics has been reverted again following the expiration of the protection you implemented o 12 August 2013. Krakkos ( talk) 23:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. I have effectively reverted a revert of yours, not because I don't trust your judgement but I think you restored the original vandalism by mistake? Helen Online 07:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. Pursuant to the Land of Punt affair, would you mind taking a look at this paragraph to make sure that it's well presented? Best, Middayexpress ( talk) 17:35, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Dougweller! I must inform you that Erim Turukku, blocked yesterday for 24h by you, continued doing precisely the same things as before his blocking, almost immediately after his block expired. How he's reverting at the article Attila, which is as you know a subject to the 1RR limitation. You'll see that he reverted more than once. His overall behavior here is very problematic, he doesn't have a good command of English, and it seems he can't edit here per WP:COMPETENCE... Also, it may be possible that Turukku and User:EMr KnG are the same person. If that's the case, I guess it would be a WP:SOCK case. As you know, in most cases its illegal to have two accounts on WP. And, edits of both Turukku ( [36]) and EMr KnG ( [37]) look really similar. I guess a WP:SPI may be needed, but I myself don't have much experience with such investigations so I'll let you and other admins and editors to decide on it. Cheers! -- Sundostund 19:08, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
My comments about "cut out..." were basically my thought process, showing why I thought that none of the "remaining edits" should be kept. I'm advising you to restore-and-delete them because (1) a G12 deletion for histmerge purposes isn't appropriate, (2) if your last deletion is a G6, anyone would be justified in requesting their restoration, and (3) the contents are copyvios of other Wikipedia articles, so they need to stay deleted, so (4) the deletion log should show that the last deletion was on copyright-related grounds. Is this clear enough? If not, leave me another note please. Nyttend ( talk) 20:14, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Could you look at Iranian people. An edit-warrior constantly reverts my edits. I've explained that the person that he try to delete is an ethnic Pashtun(Iranic) who lives in India but he doesn't care. BBBAAACCC ( talk) 23:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Could you please look at the article of Iranian people? The Indian edit warrior constantly harrasing/annoying me and vandalising Iranian people. BBBAAACCC ( talk) 15:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi you have deleted the entry for Christiane Wyler an artist living in Phuket/Thailand. Looks like due to copyright issues? Please ex[lain me what was wrong with the site as Christiane Wyler is the proper owner of all photos published on that website and as we are just in the process of getting the copyrights registered with wiki commons.
May I asking you to get that created wiki page for Christiane Wyler back?
Many thanks and best regards Christiane Wyler christiane@christiane-wyler.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.52.139.233 ( talk) 02:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Wiki commons has approved the copyrights of all the pictures used in the article about Christiane Wyler you have deleted because of copyright infringements. Got an email from Johan Boss at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that all pictures are marked. May I ask you to put the article back online? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.52.139.80 ( talk) 02:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Wiki commons has approved the copyrights of all the pictures used in the article about Christiane Wyler you have deleted because of copyright infringements. Got an email from Johan Boss at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that all pictures are marked. May I ask you to put the article back online? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.52.139.80 ( talk) 02:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Given several posts above, I've started a discussion at WP:ANI#3 more paid editors?. Dougweller ( talk) 06:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi and thank you for contacting me. I have seen all the messages you have got by an ANONYMOUS users here. I have one retorical question for you: If they know that I receive money for my work, then they also do that because we would meet on hiring website, right? I have tracked his/her IP to India. Do I have to say more? I have never written any article that does not pass at least marginal notability about the things/people I find interesting. If something is wrong, it can be fixed either way. In the end, I advice you that you track those who are hiding behind IPs, not me who contributes to Wikipedia. I am at your service for any questions. Thank you for your time. -- BiH ( talk) 07:17, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I will respond at ANI, but wanted to talk to you first. -- BiH ( talk) 08:23, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I am trying to make a single entry to the Oak Island Theories page but I keep on getting my one line entry deleted either by the automated system of editors, Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SukhwantSinghLongShip ( talk • contribs) 15:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with your redirect of this to the book. It was fine as it was, but I am unable to revert it. There is no other musical titled "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" and you redirected it to the novel, not the 1902 musical (which is called "the Wizard of Oz" NOT "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz"), as you believed. You really should have left it alone. -- Scottandrewhutchins ( talk) 19:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, any opinion on a DUCK block here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EMr KnG? Mark Arsten ( talk) 19:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I saw your comments regarding the nude photo on the Strippers article. I would think that because the photo shows identifying information from what might be seen as an intimate environment, there is an expectation of privacy. Not, of course, from paying customers but it is different for patrons of a club to see a sex worker nude and something different to have their nude photo be posted on one of the most trafficked websites of the Internet. It is not apparent that the women were even aware that their photo was being taken but even if they were, I'm sure they never expected to see themselves on a page that gets 30K views/month. For all we know, their families and friends are unaware of how they make a living. It seems like this is basic BLP, Wikipedia doesn't allow for paparazzi photos to be used for celebrities and this seems no different.
Plus, I am 100% certain there are photos that exist on the Commons of strippers who are clothed or who we see the back of, instead of a full frontal view. Liz Read! Talk! 20:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Last night I happened upon real fringe stuff being added to this article, and despite warnings, it's still going on. I already reverted twice, and I'd rather not do so again. A. Parrot ( talk) 17:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I now understand the rules and why you have done your edit.
Is there a reason why you removed the quotation from Sacha Stern which referenced the Ketubah at Antoopolis dated to Year 6 of the Shemittah Cycle, Day 20 / Month 9 on the fourth day of the week with a link to 412 C.E. on the Creation Calendar at torahcalendar.com? This sentence was accurately referenced and is scientifically verified by the link to the Creation Calendar proving that there were Jews in Egypt who were observing the calendar in 412 C.E. that had been followed by the Levitical priesthood until the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.61.178.202 ( talk) 18:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear Administrators
The page Khwarazmian dynasty is not suitable to the content of the article. Because the article is not only about the dynasty of Kwarezm Shahs but also about one of the greatest turkish empires of middle ages. For that reason I strongly request you to let me change the title to Khwarezm Turk Empire (Khwarezm Shahs Empire). For further information: http://www.allempires.com/article/index.php?q=kwarezm_shah_empire.
Sincerely ahnenerbe1935 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahnenerbe1935 ( talk • contribs) 19:43, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
User:Nataev has decided that Dilip Hiro is a historian, citing some nonsense fallacy. Apparently he is also going to remove my "unreliable source" tag applied to the Hiro "sources". Would you care to be involved in this? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 06:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Mr.Dougweller, Sir, I had recreated the page relying on the contents of the section, “Can I recreate an article that was deleted in the past?”, of the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion which states that an article that had been deleted but which was a biography of a living person may be recreated if reliable sources are included, and that the biographies of living persons created after 18 March 2010 require at least one reliable source that supports at least one statement about the subject. This is precisely what I had done but by retaining the form of the article that was deleted. I had added reference to a quote “In a later Hindu interpretation, as Ravinder Kumar (2008) says, agni stands for knowledge. The light agni emits is the light of knowledge….” from the Article titled – “An umbilical cord relation with the environment” by Dr. F. Andrew SJ, Associate Professor, Dept. of Commerce, Loyola College, Chennai published in the International Journal of Research in Commerce and Management Volume No.2 (2011), Issue No.11 (November). This fact you do not seem to have noticed.
Previously you had not found the cited book of the subject on the Amazon and therefore you had deemed the subject to be an unreliable source and had readily deleted most of the references to the subject. The same very book and other books of the subject are on the Amazon, and on the basis of the cited book that had then not found favour with you the subject has since been allotted a VIAF number which I had now taken care to mention. Since you have deleted the page you would in the hind-sight now aver that all these new additions are meaningless and not worth any notice. But then, you are a far more experienced administrator and editor, instead of pointing out to me my many faults, shortcomings, and directing me to different guidelines etc. why don’t you practically help me create this page when I have repeatedly failed? Why don’t you re-shape the article? No one stops any editor or administrator from doing that. Are we not here to cooperatively contribute and make Wikipedia grow and gain in strength? You and I at our own levels have already created numerous pages. Do help me by recasting the article and making it acceptable. In fact you will find for yourself that an administrator was actually recasting the previously deleted article to make it presentable just before the delete button was pressed on 25 June 2012.
I thank you for keeping a close watch on my activities. Regards. Soni Ruchi ( talk) 06:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, for Christiane Wyler we received a permission, OTRS ticket number 2013101110004566. Can you have a look at the article and see if you can undelete it? (I'm not an administrator at this project, so I cannot judge if there are other issues.) Kind regards, Jcb ( talk) (OTRS member) 17:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Doug, I left a response to a comment by an editor in the "Survey" section and Bahooka removed it, placing it under the only comment (also by me) in the "threaded discussion" section. I reverted his refactoring and he reverted that. It seems clear that he is attempting to proscribe editor interaction here. I see no hardwired rules on the RfC page regarding this, so what should I do? He has tried to close the RfC prematurely with a false claim of consensus based on a !Vote call that has produced no policy-based rationale or even a single response to any of the policy points I've presented, and now he is trying to preventing me from directly engaging other editors in dialog. I'm inclined to take offense at such conduct at this juncture.-- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 16:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for noticing. I'm afraid I have reason for my edit.
I wrote my editing based on the grammar note, mentioned in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 11th Edition. I copy the entry on "AD" as follows.
AD n abbreviation Anno Domini (used to indicate that a date comes the specified number of years after the traditional date of Christ's birth).
USAGE AD should be placed before the numerals, as in AD 375 (not 375 AD). The reason for this is that AD is an abbreviation of Latin anno domini, which means 'in the year of our Lord'. However, when the date is spelled out, it is normal to write the third century AD (not AD the third century). Compare with BC.
So, based on this entry, I changed all the "AD". On the contrary, BC is written after the year number.
BC n. abbreviation 1 before Christ (placed after a date, indicating that it is before the Christian era). 2 British Columbia (in official postal use).
USAGE BC is placed after the numerals, as in 72 BC (not BC 72). Compare with AD.
That's why I let the "BC"s as they are. I hope you could consider this as a reason why I did all the changes. Thank you for your attention.
Hi, based on your mail, I wasn't able to identify the sanction or user at issue, sorry. If you'd like me to look into it further, I recommend raising the mattter at WP:AE, although I'm not able to edit much the next three days. Sandstein 06:50, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
His version of the Manila article removed any references to the American burning of Manila. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Manila&oldid=581019327#American_Colonial_Period
Whereas in this version. It is clearly stated. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Manila&oldid=580563269#American_Colonial_Period
I'm currently angry at you both for conspiring to have me banned while you two strut around and delete content that makes Americans look bad. This is a very serious breach of Fairness and Neutrality. I would like to discuss this further in a civilized manner. But Im really trying hard to control my temper. Thank You
Gintong Liwanag Ng Araw ( talk) 10:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Gintong Liwanag Ng Araw ( talk) 10:51, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I was writing this last week before the block took effect and now I have to wait a whole week to post this in the talk-page. Read it ok? I am not a vandal who invents things out of thin-air and neither am I an evil person who doesn't want to achieve consensus. My calling of Manila as the City of Man is confirmed by Governor, a Journalist, A University and a Book.
Let's discuss it further in here.
/info/en/?search=Talk:Manila#Manila.2C_City_of_Man_an_explanation
Gintong Liwanag Ng Araw ( talk) 10:51, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I guess I still can't use the tb template properly after six years - or I jinxed it, it didn't make a subject, and got my sig wrong :( Chaosdruid ( talk) 17:52, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I think you reverted me by mistake at Airlines for America. If you look at my edit summaries you will see that I removed the labor relations section because it was unreliably sourced, not because of the bit about A4A supposedly being a union. The original site cited is not available but you can see it through the Way Back Machine. See here. I think it is pretty safe to say that an advocacy site for a labor union cannot possibly be reliable source for this material. Also, you will see that the edit summary you reference is only for the little chunk of text about A4A being a union. See my two edits here and here. Thanks! Intermittentgardener ( talk) 13:27, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
My username "DRGENITALIA" is Mongolian for DanozDirect. I work for a company that makes and designs mops like "The Swivel Sweeper". My pay is extremely low so I decided to work in an office. The Mongolian authorities found out and they prosecuted my family. I had nothing I could do. In Mongolia, it is illegal to switch jobs without a legitimate excuse. I really had nothing to say when the authorities came. I have no house and no place to live. I'm an intelligent person, so I decided to work in Wikipedia. I know there is no pay, but I find it happy to help other people with their work and learning new things. I also appeared on the show "Refuge" where I was interviewed about my journey to America. I learnt English their and now I am a Uni teacher in Physics and a Part Time High School teacher for Geography. I teach the 9th grade. There I also appeared on the show "Go back to where you came from" where again I was interviewed about being a refugee. After that I scraped enough money to go to Australia where I became a reporter for the "Sunday Telegraph" Now I am on my way to visit my remaining family in England and hopefully make it before remembrance day. I am also applying for a job of being a reporter on 7 News. In England I plan to get a job as a Journalist and then hopefully make it to Afghanistan for the show "Refuge" where I am the host. I also realise that my name in English is DrGenital. Sorry for my inappropriate name. Well, continuing on,, after going there I plan to fly to Russia and do a program helping Children learn about Communism. Then I also plan to visit Mongolia and visit my families grave. Now, I just want to help as much as possible with Wikipedia. Sorry for any inconvenience. - DRGENITALIA (AREM ROGEYUZ) DRGENITALIA ( talk) 07:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know that we're in the third and final stage of the RM discussion at Talk:List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible#Requested_move_09_November_2013. I'm sending you this message because you participated in an earlier stage of this discussion. We'd be grateful for your input. Thanks! Oncenawhile ( talk) 08:21, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug
I am Myron Paine, Ph. D., [39] I have advised engineering graduate students. I know the criteria for valid data and the rules for references.
I respect your role to determine that the data is valid and the references are correct for Wikipedia.
Re: Norumbega.
See the Lok map. [40] Norumbega is clearly marked on this map of 1582 by Michael Lok [41] in the location of modern New England.
The Lok map has the names of J. Cabot, 1497 and Jac. Cartier,1535. The rivers and terrain features around Norumbega are similar to the New England terrain today.
Richard Hakluyt [42]b knew what was on the map when he included the map in "Divers Voyages touching the Discoveries of America, London, 1582."
A similar, but better, drawing of Norumbega was made in Rome on a map [43] by Bolognini Zalterij in 1595.
0n both maps Norumbega is as prominent as Canada. I.e. if Canada existed, then so did Norumbega. On neither map is there an attempt to connect Norumbega to Vikings.
So the words, "Inextricably connected with attempts to demonstrate Viking incursions in New England." are misleading. They imply that the name "Norumbega was found by scholars who attempted, but did not succeed, to connect Norumbega to Vikings.
Norumbege was a correctly named location in America before AD 1600 without any indication of Vikings. Today modern scholars have repeatedly demonstrated close valid connections between Norumbega and Vikings in New England:
The French called the people in Norumbega, "Nauset." [3] [4] [If the French silent "t" is not voiced, the word "Nauset" sounds like "Norse."]
The Nauset spoke/speak Old Norse [5] [6]
Many New England place names are Old Norse, including Massachusetts, Connecticut, Narragansett, and Wampanoag, [7] [8]
The Nauset origin stories included ancient migration from Iceland [9] and
The Nauset had/have Norse DNA. See Gene Park in http://lenape-epic.blogspot.com/2012/04/norse-christians-called-lenape.html
The evidence indicates Norumbega was an established Norse settlement in America in 1497. The most knowledgeable scholars of America in 1497 knew that Norumbega was located in what would become New England. Those scholars did not know that the name was associated with Norse.
The names Norumbega and Nauset are not found on English maps after John Smith's voyage in 1614.
Modern multiple attempts to verify that Norumbega was, in fact, a Norse territory have repeatedly produced valid results, which have been ignored by the social scientists.
Ignoring a name and results DO NOT make the name legendary. There is a reason a name is ignored, i.e. maybe to cover up and erase the knowledge that the Norse were in America since 1497 at least.
Then the 17th century English accepted the Columbus was first myth to deny Norse presence in North America. The issues were the Doctrine of Discovery [44] and the English Charters, which stipulated that the English could not settle where there were Christians already, settled. [45]
Any hint that Nauset were in Norumbega was a serious concern for the Puritans.
I think Norumbega should read:
Norumbega (orNorumbègue,Nurumbega, etc.) was a place name for modern New England on the world's maps for 119 years. (AD 1497 - 1616).
In 1616 Robert Clerke drew Captain John Smith's Voyage to Norumbega and beyond.
[10]
Clerke omitted both Canada and Norumbega from the map. Norumbega never appeared on an English map again.
French maps of a century later still show Norumbega near New England.
The French found Nauset (pronounced "Nause") in Norumbega. The Nauset spoke a dialect of Old Norse. Many place names in Norumbega are Old Norse.
DNA studies show that on the northern route into the United States, the Norse people mixed with [American] peoples. That fact is 98.7 percent fact, confirmed by y-DNA.
Have a good one
Myron f — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyronDavidPaine ( talk • contribs) 17:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Daniel
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Mitchell
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).I wasn't sure if I should make another thread at ANI or if you can handle this without all that, since you made a posting in that thread saying you would block if User:BGCTwinsEdit kept uploading images constituting copyright infringement. Today they uploaded two more, despite being told explicitly why their defense didn't work in that thread, as well as on their talk page by another user. [46] The two images uploaded can be seen here [47] [48] LM2000 ( talk) 19:54, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm new to editing wikipedia but browsing over some of the policies makes me wonder what wikipedia actually is and what it presents itself to be.
"Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media" "Its content is determined by previously published information"
One would think that a gigantic encyclopedia would be interested in actual fact, truth and reality. Not just facts or opinions that someone has printed somewhere.
It seems wikipedia is really the "encyclopedia" of what people "think" happened, based on third-party media sources. I guess that's why you call it "wikipedia" instead of "encyclopedia".
I'm having difficulty understanding the verifiability and reliable source policies. I think they are in need of some restructuring.
I don't think i'm going to be a wikipedia editor, but it is a shame that a source of information that many go to seems quick to present the negative, not the positive, and not the neutral it claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonDeva ( talk • contribs) 20:08, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
FYI: new article List of Dalit Hindu saints links to List of Adivasi Hindu saints. Ruby Murray 22:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I was removing that content and you have been adding it repeatedly another user has undone you now. Marchoctober ( talk) 23:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug,
You shared a citation you found,
“The Pharos of Alexandria,” Proceedings of the British Academy 30: 277–92
on my talk page. I've been to my friendly local academic library with that citation, and what seems to be going on is that the Proceedings of the British Academy in that era were published as separate monographs, which would have been cataloged by libraries as individual books. Searching the well computerized catalog of my alma mater library didn't turn up a shelf location for this volume. Of course, as I was looking this up, I saw other online references to this source, perhaps some that built the Wikipedia article and some cribbed from the Wikipedia article that cited this source, but I can't say that I have succeeded in verifying this source yet. I am keeping it in a source list document that I always take with me whenever I go to the academic library, and I'll keep trying. Feel free to bring up other research puzzlers as you find. Thanks for your constructive work on the project; it's always good to see another editor who is diligent about seeking out reliable sources. -- WeijiBaikeBianji ( talk, how I edit) 18:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Esc2003 has launched a campaign in the Urartu article to remove any sort of association of the Urartu civilization with that of the Armenian people. In a comment on the talk page of a Turkish speaking user, Esc2003 pointed out that the article was " "too Armenian" (fazla Ermenileştirilmemiş) and that something must be done. Since then, he has tried to make the Urartu article seem as though it is as Persian as it is Armenian. I feel that the only remedy to this is an AE sanction. Don't know of any warnings given to him however. But he has been sent to AE before. Is that not sufficient enough? Proudbolsahye ( talk) 18:57, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
A while back you and I shared the same concerns about this editor ( User_talk:NeilN/Archive_13#Vcorani). Can you please look at today's contributions [49]? They seem to lack the same sort of clue, especially on Cold case review. -- NeilN talk to me 16:57, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Heh, Tom Harrison Talk 21:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Kaveh Farrokh was proposed for deletion and the debate resulted in this entry to be redirected to his publisher. I am concerned about his notability and proposed it for deletion again. -- ,dgjdksvc;jknhg ( talk) 05:18, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
This kind of thing is getting worrisome. Of course it has to claim that the Welsh Annwn appears in an Irish poem.-- Cúchullain t/ c 15:05, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
I am well aware of the Annwn issue and have resolved it. I only put it there in the first place because I was unaware that "Celtic Otherworld" has its own page. -- Bard Cadarn 16 November 2013) —Preceding undated comment added 14:18, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Pashupati seal Does not shows seated ithyphallic. It shows animals surrounding a human. All of 24 tirthankararas are associated with 1 animal. example Lord Mahavir is associated with Lion, Pasarvnath with snake, Rishab with Bull, Shantinath with Deer. The striking feature is that, there is deer below the seat of human (Exactly this is the way jains put one animal as a symbol below the seat of their Tirthankaras). All tirthankars are nude but not ithyphallic like shiva.I saw the similarity hence i disseminated my knowledge of history. I think it is good to have others point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.204.213.43 (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2013 (UTC) Jainism teaches tolerance to other religions but it also teaches to stand for truth. Hinduism and Jainism both originated from Indus civilization and both are as old as history can go. So, how can one say that there cannot be (or must not be) any Jain idol or picture in Indus valley? how can one say that there cannot be roots of Jainism in Indian history/Indus valley? Yes , Pashupati is one of the names of shiva. Hinduism is very popular in India. Can any one tell me if, Hindus place a small icon of animal under the seat/throne of Shiva exactly like this in picture?
As far as the name " pashupati seal is concerned, it was given by a british archaeologist. Probably because Hinduism was very popular and Shiva rides on bull. Also because pashupati is one of the names of shiva. But, this is a modern nomenclature, there is no such name as 'pashupati seal' in brahmi language. It is not the name written on the picture. Therefore i am sharing my knowledge of history. dissemination of knowledge is not a crime...why my posts are deleted with bias? Yes I have been to Kathmandu Pashupati Nath temple and i have seen the idol of shiva. It is different !Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (
talk •
contribs)
The reason for stating the anarchist anthropolist's politics is because the cited observation about the correlation of religion and coinage in the Axis Age is that it is stated in the cited book which is a book of importance to anarchist theory and it enables one to understand from what viewpoint the association of the new philosophies and coinage is made. Cogiati ( talk) 12:53, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Please see Want to be a guinea pig for Flow?. X Ottawahitech ( talk) 17:04, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Young Justice (TV series). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Why this edit? It seems to be fashionable to strike blocked editors' comments, but I have no idea why. Whatever their merits, they were clearly intended to, in their minds, improve the article. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 09:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! Thanks for bringing to my attention that close paraphrasing may have occurred. I stress to students the importance of using their own words and not copying other people's work, even if with minor changes. It would count as a violation of academic integrity and carry a penalty. I will look into it. Also, if you could leave a message directly on User_talk:Tdwyer9532 with your feedback, that would be helpful. I will tell all the students to look at their Talk pages. Finally, if you're interested in being an online ambassador for this course in the future, do let me know (email would be best). Your experience would be valuable to us all. Thanks! Chapmansh ( talk) 13:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but what exactly are you referring to? Cyclonebiskit ( talk) 19:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I hereby declare my apology i was ignorant but my intention was not to spam but to provide some useful info for readers with help of wikipedia and this is to inform you i will not continue to contribute further by providing links.
regards gkrish — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkrish1001 ( talk • contribs) 10:35, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:10, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I question whether full-protection is necessary here. Semi-protection would seem to suffice. I could see full-protecting an article where a run-of-the-mill edit-war was occurring between IP's and registered users, as semi-protection would force the IP's to discuss while allowing the registered users to continue editing. This was a case of a single-purpose IP with an obvious conflict of interest warring with multiple users. Semi-protection would end the disruption while allowing editors to continue to improve the article. Joefromrandb ( talk) 05:11, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Someone off-site pointed to this. I'm finding it hard to assess given that the entire first page of GHits is to their own website(s) (they appear to have several). After clearing that away it's hard to tell how seriously to take it: I found at least one book which compared it to Jediism as a made-up thing. Mangoe ( talk) 12:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Note that in my revisions to the Page on the Genetic history of indigenous peoples of the Americas, I based my citations on European origin on the coverage of the paper in the journal Nature's news article covering the piece -- which mentions "European roots" in its title. ( http://www.nature.com/news/americas-natives-have-european-roots-1.14213) While the material itself is not part of the same peer-reviewed study, the article reflects the authors' interpretation. I tried to cite those views directly in my entry. Overall, the conclusions of the paper seem to be best summarized in the Nature News article in a quote from Theodore Schurr: '“The data from this paper support a single-migration scenario,” he says, but still allows for several sequential ones from the same intermingled Siberian gene pool.'
The concepts of "Europe" and "Asia" are not truly scientific, but reflect a cultural convention. I think "western Eurasia" is technically more precise, but that's not something that's necessarily accessible to most readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A2fnr ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gita Govinda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mithila ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
This editor keeps reverting changes on Jewish diaspora to a version which is framed in non-neutral/POV terms. I've tried talking this out with him, but to no avail. He is not following Wiki guidelines and is now engaging in an edit war. Help is needed. Evildoer187 ( talk) 15:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
FYI, I submitted WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Allenroyboy#26 November 2013.— Machine Elf 1735 06:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you deleted this article. The topic is a real thing [55] [56] [57]; if it doesn't warrant its own article, there may be material suitable for inclusion in the Chevrolet Master article. — rybec 19:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Talk:Royal family SergeWoodzing ( talk) 12:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
How do I go about having an article, that is falsely sourced, deleted? I contacted the editor that created the article, [58] stating that I did not find any mention of Nazaruddin being the architect of the Niujie Mosque. As of 27 November I have not received any response from user:GHYU666, therefore I have decided to have the article deleted. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 07:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rock art may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Doug,
The Constitution Party state affiliation pages that I have been creating (and you have subsequently been deleting and redirecting) have been nothing more than copied code of other CP stub pages that I found and have just updated with current contact information for that particular state.
There ARE plenty of secondary references available for these state affiliates of which the listed state party contacts will soon be adding. The Constitution Party and its many state affiliates has been around for OVER TWENTY YEARS and thus it cannot be denied that it is a notable organization.
Unless you are planning on deleting every single stub page on Wikipedia, I do not think your actions are appropriate.
ALSO, please note that the Constitution Party of West Virginia page began as a stub page created by Ngfan1 on November 13, 2013 and it wasn't until almost a year later (November 7, 2013) that I stumbled across it and began adding the external references - which now number almost SEVENTY (70), by the way.
Please give this some time. Thank you.
- Lexington — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexington62 ( talk • contribs) 18:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Patriotic Nigras. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
An IP user added a well-founded adjective to the article lede. A user reverted it on contentious grounds. I restored the good-faith edit (on solid grounds: the man was merely accused of a crime - one he vehemently denied, and much evidence suggests he may have not committed - and was never tried or convicted of anything, criminal or civil, only charged with the deed by a blue-ribbon panel). Immediately, that edit was reverted; when I restored the original content (and re-stated briefly a stronger case for its inclusion) the original reverter reverted it and slapped an edit war warning on my Talk page. (A most peremptory and imperious gambit. Hey, I've been quietly editing at Wikipedia for going on six years and close to 15,000 edits with less than 2% of my edits being Talk or User Talk, dodging controversy and slogging along.).
No sooner that than another user piled on.
Might doesn't make right, nor does a 2nd user. But it's enough for me to walk away. I don't need the headaches, and Truth isn't the point here, obviously. Wikiuser100 ( talk) 04:42, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
1 Invitation to WikiProject Hotels 2 Promoting some smile 3 A barnstar for you! 4 Wambach article invitation 5 Care to take another pass at the Weetamoo article? 6 Ordering of sections for medical content 7 Disambiguation link notification for May 4 8 Disambiguation link notification for May 20 9 Please discuss 10 Disambiguation link notification for September 29 11 November 2013
I have encountered a "new user" Cobanas that is continuing the removal of referenced information, previously done by an IP. I will be starting a discussion on the talk page of the article, but I would be surprised if this "new user" Cobanas participates. I just thought I would give you a heads up. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments on the talk page of Glastonbury Tor. I've changed the geology as suggested and added a sentence about Hutton's medieval spiral walkway theory. Could you take a look and see if there is anything else you think is needed?— Rod talk 12:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
This article appears to be plagiarized from this book, "Martial races of undivided India", by Vidya Prakash Tyagi, [63]. And, according to User:Utcursch/plagiarism from Wikipedia, this book is copied from Wikipedia. Your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
I have deleted this Moderen Era part of the article because in Philip Edward Jones book only Awan tribe is mentioned.Someone has corrupted the original text of the book by inserting Khokhar/Awan and then pasting it as a reference.You can read the book to verify my claim. ( Kingofjungle ( talk) 21:07, 29 November 2013 (UTC))
my last edit was encountered by you , it was about the "al jazari" i think the reference about his kurdish ethnicity refered to the age he was living in , which was the same time & era that saladin the great was in war with europeans in current palestine (or israel)& he was ruling over the middle east i'm wondering why you removed a resourced article! when we are talking about some one , we have to tell people that what ethnicity he was from... for example alexander the great was a greek from macedonian ethnicity , etc al jazari was living in an kurdish habbited area ( diyar bakir ), the common language in that era was arabic , even persians & turks used to write & read in arabic it is not necessarily mean's that he was an arab please let the article be as the way it was ... thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobanas ( talk • contribs) 13:39, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. An editor with a COI, Brian Josephson, has recently been contributing to
Talk:Water memory. In my opinion, his behavior has recently become tendentious. See, for instance,
#Pollack's water conferences, where he has advocated for the inclusion of unsourced content, saying "A Bayesian analysis indicates that any source I produce would be declared 'not RS' with high probability. Accordingly, I will not use up any of my valuable time looking for one.
" I think it may be appropriate to let him know about Arbcom's discretionary sanctions for pseudoscience, but I'm not an admin, so I can't post
the template. Could you take a look, when you get a chance, and post the template if you feel it is appropriate? There's no major rush, I'm just hoping this will head off future issues. Thanks. —
Jess·
Δ
♥ 16:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_basques10.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.174.135.252 ( talk) 21:05, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest limit. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 1 December 2013 (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 25 | ← | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | → | Archive 35 |
Doug: With regard to Articles for Deletion/Van Tuyl you commented: "The publisher of the book in question is "R.L. Van Tuyl, distributor". This clearly fails WP:SPS and should not be used as a source."
The book was published in 1996 and sold out completely that year. It is no longer available for distribution. this was not a commercial plug, but rather a reference to the best - and most authoritatively researched - book on the topic. I cannot see how using this is in any way commercial.
Rory Van Tuyl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rory Van Tuyl ( talk • contribs) 19:01, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about this article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kayaking#Kayak roll article - your comments would be greatly appreciated. Alansplodge ( talk) 16:11, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Although I know that a definitive "close" has become somewhat rare at WP:RSN, would you be willing to make a call on the consensus at Wikipedia:RSN#caic.org.au? I am asking because the source is somewhat widely used, and the various related talk pages are generally inhabited by the same editors (making the same arguments) as have been at the RSN. Thank you for considering it. -- Tgeairn ( talk) 01:34, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gia Bình District. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 01:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug - there is a new editor (anon from Spain) whose interests, syntax etc appears to be very similar to a previous blocked user on this topic. Or perhaps its my imagination. Would appreciate your thoughts or input before I find myself in a tiresome edit war on this page, as I previously have, and I only have a few windows of time for WP at the moment. Cheers Nickm57 ( talk) 02:37, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
See this discussion: [1] - you are mentioned. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 02:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Abraham may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:17, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Theory of the Portuguese discovery of Australia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 11:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
What evidence is that Edomites were enemies of Israel during the 10th century BCE. they may have been subjects. BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The bible states that the Edomites were conquered by King David and were under King Solomon's domination and only broke free after King Solomon's death. So in the 10th century they were under Israeli domination BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The reason I removed the stuff on the copper mine was because it had nothing to do with the copper mine. What these sources refer to is an Egyptian building found there that we have recently discovered had nothing to do with the copper mine BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
A user has recently begun to remove the Lur categories from different articles, i understand that it needs a source, but what about the people with surnames like Bakhtiar (which means Bakhtiarian), i guess that the surname confirms that the person is an Lur/Bakhtiari? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 16:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but i asked Dougweller (an admin), not some editor who removed it. A surname means much plus many of these people were born in places populated by Lurs/Bakhtiaris. But i guess Dougweller can explain. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 16:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Do you think that this [2] is reliable enough? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:40, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dougweller,
I've seen your revert and think that your revert is partly right but still think that you shouldn't have to remove everything there was. Georgian airways, rugby union members and currency indeed uses the Borjgali and it is a reality. However I would welcome your suggestions. GJ. GEORGIANJORJADZE 18:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you revised an edit I made. I can understand the bit about OR I suppose, but what is meant by language we can't use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.149.41 ( talk) 00:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the constructive comments on the Mima Mounds attempt. I have given up writing articles. It was time to quit at 75 while things were still reasonable. This is one reason I wanted this particular matter to end on a positive note. I had only hoped someone else would pick up on a good idea and not let it die. I will not be trying to write to Wikepedia again.
I have not yet given up trying to interest someone else to write an article or do some research, but am getting close to doing so.
Charles M. Hansen 85.80.205.84 ( talk) 09:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dougweller again,
Can you please take on your watch these two articles and put the protection on them for some time? Colchis and Caucasian Iberia are vandalised by one user who removes all the sources all the time without even discussing it. Thanks. GEORGIANJORJADZE 10:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller "HistoryofIran" user vandalism in Lurs and Luristan page. He remove All Historical images and "Lur people of iran" map no valid reason. I ask you to stop doing this "HistoryofIran" user.
/info/en/?search=User:HistoryofIran
/info/en/?search=Lorestan_Province
Thank you Setenlyacc ( talk) 05:36, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Capricorn (astrology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sumerian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:50, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dougweller,
I've added the references and images back in the article and hope you don't mind. Thanks. GEORGIANJORJADZE 21:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, it seems that user who edited that article dont want to discuss this problem and only reverting edits. I have already write him about it, but he ignoring my messages and still reverts edits. Please warm him about it.-- Δαβίδ ( talk) 10:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Could you kindly take a look at User Talk:Premknutsford25, a user you've already warned and I've also issued a final warning, and then note that post-final warning the user has again reverted to their preferred version. I could probably argue that all of my reverts so far have been to enforce policy and thus I'm not WP:INVOLVED, but there's no real reason to stretch the matter. If you prefer, I can take the matter to WP:EWNB for a wholly independent review. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Millions of articles or searches like angelina, abhishek, gomez also have same person listed in the (names) article, as well as the search itself, So are we going to correct them all just like we did on avril? aish.ego ( talk) 10:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Your inflammatory and deliberately bad faith accusations aside, I strongly disagree with your edits as WP:UNDUE. Neil MacGregor of the British Museum himself has stated his view of the cylinder as a declaration of human rights, as have numerous others as the sources indicate, proving your accusations against me to be wrong and defamatory. Criticism of this view should certainly be included, but your version is totally written in the most POV and revisionist manner possible. Laval ( talk) 11:09, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Just so anyone reading my page knows what I said: "At Cyrus Cylinder you removed the sourced text "claimed to be an early "human rights charter", though the British Museum and a number of scholars of the ancient Near Eastern history reject this view as anachronistic [1] and a misunderstanding [2]" and replaced it with "identified by scholars and archaeologists as the oldest known charter of universal human rights." This is a clear violation of WP:NPOV in that it removed sourced text showing a difference of opinion and added material, less well sourced, just showing one point of view.
Your edit summary suggested to other editors that you'd simply added sources, not that you'd removed some and made a major change in the text.
And you've misused your sources. The Guardian article [3] says "The Cyrus cylinder is often called the world's oldest human rights document, but it was common in Mesopotamia for kings to begin their rule with such reform declarations, according to the British Museum." You can't use that to call it the first human rights charter, only to say that it is often called that, and you certainly can't use a statement that denies it's the first human rights charter to say that it is.
The other article uses the word 'reputedly' and says "Museum curator Adamjee says when people call the cylinder a declaration of human rights, they may be reading what they want to see into an artifact with a more prosaic purpose. The cylinder was a foundation deposit, like a time capsule in a cornerstone in a prominent modern building. Adamjee calls it "a very traditional kingship document. The inscriptions mention a particular ruler and his lineage and invite the blessings of the divinities to protect the structure they were building." So, Adamjee says, "it's anachronistic to use 20th century terms to describe events that happened two thousand five hundred years ago." - if you are going to use this as a source, what was your reason for leaving all of this out?
This is hotly disputed issue and your changes removed the dispute and mispresented the sources. Please don't do this again. Dougweller ( talk) 10:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)"
Asd for Neil McGregor, he wrote "It has even been described as the first declaration of human rights, and while this was never the intention of the document -- the modern concept of human rights scarcely existed in the ancient world -- it has come to embody the hopes and aspirations of many." Dougweller ( talk) 12:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Doug, an array of single edit socks seem keen on inserting the same first person account here. Appears to be copyvio, but I can't seem to find a source, could you possibly take some action here? As I've reverted something that's not an obvious copyvio, I'm not going to do it. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 13:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Just saw your block of RealTimeLords1. Please also see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Callump90 for further background on this user. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 17:55, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug,
As an editor with a long involvement in the Stonehenge article I would value your input on the latest content disagreement. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ( Talk Contribs) 06:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " List of species rumored/believed to still be alive". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! -- Guy Macon ( talk) 13:58, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug, sorry to drag all this up again. I've just reverted this edit to Patricia Cloherty removing a reliably sourced claim that the subject received an award from Putin. Apparently a source confirming she received the award "does not relate" to a claim in the article that she received the award. But I've also just noted this edit to a related article making a claim about the same person, sourced to the same unreliable source as last time ("COPI"). Even if it were determined to have been a reliable source, surely it's a WP:PRIMARY source and shouldn't be used for statements like that. From what I can see, one opposing lawyer has suggested that her testimony was contradictory. That allegation is now being used in our article as a source to support an apparent statement of fact. I've taken this to ANI and you were the only one who bothered to look at it. I don't want to get into an edit war on yet another article. Any chance you could take a look? Cheers, Stalwart 111 22:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Dear Dougweller, Im edited the article in my User:Vahram Mekhitarian/Armenian Eternity sign page and think that correct. Can I move the content of my userpage in to the main article Armenian Eternity sign? Vahram Mekhitarian ( talk) 23:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to say - seams you do a good job. Always stay this fair and neutral regards Ginosti ( talk) 03:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Edit warring. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Doug, there's a new wikiproject created WP:WikiProject Mirza and all bios that have the name Mirza in them are being added to it. The scope of the WP and the Mirza article seem to indicate that this is some weird synthesis, apparently like having a WikiProject Smith and tagging articles to it. Not really sure what to do in this case, I came across it after a repeatedly deleted article on my watchlist sprouted up again and was tagged with this. Can you or one of your able watchlisters take a look at this? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 05:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Should the long list of relatives in the infobox be there? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Flanders - Zananiri ( talk) 15:24, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
This user just does'nt talk. Inspite of numerous SPI's, warnings still he is silent. He reverted your helpful messages. What can we do with him? Sohambanerjee1998 11:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Can you revdel something if I email you the diff? - Sitush ( talk) 10:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your message Doug.
Apologies for breaking the rules. As someone who is new to wikipedia the references you posted are very useful. I'll have a thorough read before adding to any more articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shorinjikempo ( talk • contribs) 15:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Zheng He may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humor. Best wishes. Diego ( talk) 16:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
You have a weird definition of "edit war" if you think I'm doing it. Edit war means "reverting", but I'm not reverting - I'm trying new content with each edit, each time trying to address the points raised by the people who reverted (who are different each time, BTW). You'll notice that
WP:EDITCONSENSUS is policy, and that both
WP:BRD and
WP:REVERT recommend using reverts as a last resort.
Diego (
talk) 16:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, that user added the same text agein. I dont want to revert his edits, please warm him.-- Δαβίδ ( talk) 17:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
The page that you are referring to is from a website of Indian government which are in public domain. And they are essentially provisions in constitution/law and therefore re-rendering might not be good. Aravind V R ( talk) 14:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm a bit, (underestimate), short for time for the next few weeks due to life pressures, Doug, but I certainly would like to revise this article. I thought I'd try to start a CE and revision tonight, but it has all sorts of problems (sourcing, insufficient clarity over the Sheba/Sabaean people nexus, failure to distinguish early from late traditions, etc.etc.) and it began to look like a headache requiring a few days at least, which I don't have at the moment. Could you be so kind as to keep my promise on the backboiler and give me a nudge if I don't get to do some overhauling there within the next month or so? I tend to forget a lot of things like this. Cheers. Nishidani ( talk) 20:05, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, please take some action about that article or deletion discussion. I removed that content but administrator said that such issues should be addressed to you.-- Δαβίδ ( talk) 18:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. Would it be possible for you to check for an OTRS ticket for this image obtained from this photo at http://www.pooppeepuke.com/. It has been marked as pending since February. Thanks. — CactusWriter (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
There is an ongoing edit war with (I presume) an ISP with a dynamic address here, who wants to give what I & another editor feel is undue prominence to a fringe view here, although one promoted by an otherwise respectable scholar. In his first incarnation he added to the main article Camuliana which is fair enough. But here it is too prominent for a view with no other academic support. I'd be grateful if you could take a look. Cheers, Johnbod ( talk) 21:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
If you read my message correctly, you'll notice I didn't call him a vandal, just his actions, and his actions are vandalism. I included four reliable secondary sources to an undisputed fact that was previously (and still is) unattributed, and he went on to revert my entire edit and removed said sources, which is also information suppression. If he had acted in the correct manner, he would have simply reformulated the sentence and left the sources. He did not. The assertion that I attributed with four reliable secondary sources is not in dispute, only the way I have formulated the sentence is in dispute. Thus, he should have changed the sentence, but not delete the sources.-- Kobayashi245 ( talk) 10:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings Dougweller. Thank you for your note. Yep, but you beat me to the revert that really mattered... At least it saved me a journey to ARV. Cheers! -- Technopat ( talk) 15:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Azerbaijani nationalist(s) using various IPs are warring to have modern Azerbaijani name included on Nader Shah, Shah of Iran. Nader was Turkic, but he came from North-East Iran and there's no evidence he spoke Azerbaijani. He certainly didn't use the modern Azeri script. Semi-protect? -- Folantin ( talk) 13:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Re: the Buddhakahika SPI, it's no good blaming the bot. Some might say that a good workman never blames his tools but I'll just point you to the first sentence of this section. - Sitush ( talk) 15:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC) (make sure I sign this one!)
Dougweller - regarding reverting the recent Phoenicia edit with quotes from Rawlinson and Urquhart, I agree perhaps quotes are long, and perhaps you can help edit for brevity. But the fact they are old is relevant and expected given the long view of Phoenician History. Most Phoenician full histories were written in the nineteenth century.. kenrick, Rawlinson,Movers, etc.. Most recent contributions (Baumgarten, Moscati) have been focused on specific subjects (Sanconiathon, cultural heritage) and less comprehensive. I am interested in your view, but would like to keep some portion of the quotes of historians well versed in the subject. - Thx again for your interest and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabujawdeh ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I certainly am not looking to get blocked from editing, but I am genuinely confused as to how this became such an issue. I added Major League Baseball Hall of Famer Buck Ewing to the 1906 Death section as he died on the 6th of October that year. He is being removed, first by DerbyCountyinNZ, and now you. There is no anger on my part, so there will be no cursing from me or reason to block me. There are literally hundreds of other hall of famers listed in the death sections of pages. Why is this ONE individual not being allowed to remain? You talk about adding everyone with an article would overload the page. There are more entries in the death entries of one month in 2013 than there are for the entire year of 1906, so I fail to see how overloading can be an issue. This individual is a Hall of Famer, not some cashier at a local market. I've seen dozens of entries for baseball players with very little credentials listed in the death pages. If he is to be removed for insignificance or overloading, then he should be the first of many removed. He IS significant and his continued removal seems overly nitpicky for such a small entry. I ask that the man's entry be allowed to remain as it shows respect for his accomplishments in baseball and, quite frankly, the reasons given for its removal seem trivial. Twinsdude ( talk) 06:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I have mentioned at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3/Workshop a request for some sort of rough draft of rough guidelines for religion. I believe you have participated in previous attempts regarding this matter, and I believe that your input on why you thought such guidelines were needed, and possibly why you believe they still are, would be very welcome and useful, as well as, of course, any input you might have on any of the other proposals. John Carter ( talk) 15:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this page, the lead is under siege again, first by a IP and the from a first time editor. -- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 17:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
I work with John. The term may be 60 years old. If it is, we can get rid of the reference to Simcha Jacobovici coining it but recently there’s been a specific controversy relating to its use in Israel. I don’t see why you should censor the reference to Professor Goren and Dr. Deutsch, nor do I see why there shouldn’t be any links to the various articles – pro and con – relating to this issue. Are you trying to make the entry more accurate? Or are you trying to censor the debate? Also, I note your aggressive tone and don’t understand it. ( Naustin1980 ( talk) 18:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC))
I just reposted taking your comments into consideration. I changed Simcha Jacobovici "coining" the term to "reintroducing" the term. I also made reference to the controversy breaking out in Israel. As far as I can see, there are no living persons issues. We quote Professor Goren and make absolutely no comments about him. Similarly, we quote Dr. Deutsch. That's all. You've taken out all references to Simcha Jacobovici's blog. By doing so, all you've done is tell one side of the story. It seems that you may be determined to censor this debate and I don't understand why the "free encyclopedia" would want to stop people from knowing that a debate is going on. In recent times, Jacobovici has blogged in the Times of Israel and on his own site. Several members of Tel Aviv University have written a response. Biblical Archaeology Review has published an ad and written an editorial. This issue has involved literally thousands of people and hundreds of academics. The post is fair and balanced and simply refers people to the various opinions. I hope you let people make up their own minds.
( Naustin1980 ( talk) 21:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC))
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, I've picked you at random for your expertise and I was hoping to get your advice (but not your direct intervention, as that might be forum shopping). In mid-August I removed some text at The Big Bang Theory because it struck me as WP:SYNTHESIS, as the text attempted to conclude something that was not explicitly stated in its sources, and the only sources were cherrypicked positive reviews that supported the summary. It was weirdly circular. Basically, "Critics started liking the series as time went on. 'I liked this season' said a critic."
A semi-retired user reverted my edit, but didn't explain how it was not synthesis. I've attempted to discuss on the talk page, but the user didn't give me a clear explanation. I attempted to discuss on his talk page, but I still didn't get a clear explanation. I've twice attempted to invite people from WikiProject Television [4] [5] to tepid response, and I've opened an RfC [6], but I've gotten poor response and non-committal answers. What's a next reasonable step? I really want to get this off my plate. Seems silly that something that seems like such a no-brainer to me could be stone-walled like this. I only have two people who sort-of agree with me, can I make my change yet or do I have to wait for more input? Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I am looking for something very much like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Timeline_of_human_prehistory . I'd like to add Things from E.O. Wilson's Social Conquest of Earth and notes about various genes, like fox2p that many believe strongly correlates with language development, etc, etc*0.5. The user Das Baz, aka Erudil seems to have disappeared.
I'm more interested in the timeline that the "main articles", so, is it legit to just add stuff to the timeline? You can send me to the Teahouse or other, but, you have so many entries on the talk page, I thought I would ask you first. Bodysurfinyon ( talk) 15:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Even if the world is mean, this kitten still doesn't care cause that's what cats are like. Anyway, you're a fine editor and admin and usually a voice of reason, and I appreciate it.
Drmies (
talk) 17:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Edit by you, [9] i would like to say that one of the line in the same page reads "English writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1885), writing under...", another one is "At least one early Christian writer, Basil of Caesarea (329–379)".. so it's not like writers are not accepted for the page. I would like to add some more suggestion, that supports the similar theory, this one by Science historian [10], Helaine Selin. Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 13:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
"One finds in Veda intelligent speculations about the genesis of the universe from non-existence, the configuration of the universe, the spherical self supporting earth, and the year of 360 days divided into 12 equal parts of 30 days each with a periodical intercalary month. In the Aitareya Brahmana, we read of the moon's monthly elongation and the cause of day and night."(ref)
---Medieval India---
Scientists such as Aryabhatta, Bhaskara, Makkibhatta, Brahmagupta, Varahmihira and others had also wrote about Earth's spherical form, and it's revolving, besides measuring it's diameter in a greatly precise way for their time. [12]
This one is done, now another topic, similar though, the page Spherical Earth, i just checked it's full history, and it's obvious that you have been active big time. The page included the book by Helaine Selin as source, mentioned above, as well as other sources. Although the source of Selin became unavailable, it couldn't be verified, thus it was removed. So what you think now, about this version [13] or [14]. I think the similar version regarding "India" as well as lead paragraph can be brought back. Because "Early Astronomy and Cosmology" doesn't seem to be available, nor there's any 2nd source other than this wikipedia page which would confirm that it's talking about Rigveda. "Early+Astronomy+and+Cosmology"+page+68&rlz=1C1GGGE_enIN421&es_sm=93&ei=wPFSUqf7KsqUrAflnID4Aw&start=20&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=679&dpr=1. Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 17:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
You have repeatedly deleted the Torman page of your own accord without any consultation with administration, the page is completely referenced, i will continually reinstate the page until you take it to Admin and propose it for deletion,,if after consensus it is agreed that the page should be deleted i will not reinstate the page-- Prograce ( talk) 15:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
You are deleting pages without making any credible argument,, calling it a hoax of your own accord is not acceptable,,it is completely sourced,, if you have a problem take it to admin-- Prograce ( talk) 15:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
All articles created by this sock puppet have been deleted either by me or another Administrator, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prestigiouzman/Archive. Dougweller ( talk) 10:21, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Doug, the Bulldozer archaeology page is the product of two of Simcha's paid employees, for the purposes of defaming Prof. Yuval Goren. They're obviously new to WP, and are just trying to legitimize the claims against Goren by self-citing. -- XKV8R ( talk) 18:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi - I apologize in advance if this is an inappropriate request and constitutes canvassing, however, I was hoping to engage you in informal dispute resolution on a WP:CIVIL issue in a two-editor thread that appears not to be self-resolving. For full disclosure, I'd previously made a request of User:OrangeMike, but I believe he's offline now. I chose you at random to request informal dispute resolution as a precursor to RfC/U (if necessary), if you have a few minutes available (I certainly understand if you do not). I've posted a brief summary below and I'm certain the other involved editor will shortly provide his perspective, as well.
Background: The entry Ronan Farrow has recently been heavily edited through insertion of promotional language by a large number of single-purpose sockpuppets. A seven-identity sock was recently uncovered and banned. The two remaining editors, myself and Tenebrae, had been engaged in a cooperative process of resolving much of the promotional language that had been inserted in the article, but came to a disagreement on one sentence. I believed the source of our disagreement to be grammatical in nature. Tenebrae believed the source of our disagreement was content-based and thought my suggested edit constituted POV insertion. Since there were only two active editors, and to resolve this impasse, I posted a RfC. Unfortunately, the RfC has become - I believe - derailed through aggressive name-calling by Tenebrae who - prior to the RfC - had been extremely gregarious and civil. Specifically, in the last 24 hours:
Attempted Resolutions to Date: I requested, seven times, not to be name-called, however, this has not helped resolve the situation and I believe the inundation of personal attacks is scaring away other editors from commenting on the RfC. After all of the above were posted, I told Tenebrae I would not engage with him further until he "calmed down a little." This has also not helped resolve the situation. At this point there are only 2 confirmed editors participating in the RfC - Tenebrae and myself - and a single IP editor has posted his first comment ever to WP in this thread as well, though dealing with the RfC and not the User Conduct question. (For full disclosure, I have expressed a sense of reserved skepticism about a first-time IP editor appearing in a lightly-trafficked, but sock-heavy, thread almost immediately after the RfC was opened.)
Other Factors: Separate from this issue, I posted two quotes from Tenebrae (about me) in my userspace as part of page decor/personalization. Tenebrae told me he was offended and requested I remove them. I apologized and stated I would remove them, though Tenebrae edited my userspace himself before I could (which I don't have a problem with as I had planned on editing it anyway). This occurred following the spate of name-calling and it was not my intent to offend Tenebrae, but I acknowledge it had that effect and take ownership for using his content in my userspace.
Tenebrae is a user with a long-history of achievements on WP; certainly a history that eclipses my own. I am convinced of his maturity and goodwill. At the present time, we're - however - unable to move forward with actual edits as we are the only two editors and the RfC has descended into one party name-calling the other and making accusations of poor faith, and the other editor simply repeating requests not to be subjected to name-calling and accusations of poor faith. No content dialog is occurring. Thank you for any counsel you can provide to us. BlueSalix ( talk) 20:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Bulldozer Archaeology". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 15 October 2013.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee. 01:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller,
I'm delighted with the sanitation undertaken by you in the Haplogroup I-M438 article. A certain user (no names mentioned) had been formerly very stubborn in maintaining the unreliable sources in question. Part of them (namely Kenneth Nordvedt) have now also been introduced by other Slav nationalists in the genetics section of the Croats article. Could you consider kicking the hornet's nest and clean out the pseudo-science once and for all? Praxis Icosahedron ϡ ( TALK) 04:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for catching my reversion to prior vandalism. I usually try to keep that possibility in mind or at least glance at the finished product as a double check. I am afraid that even after having become aware of the problem some time ago, I have missed this a few times (out of many). I know we need to strive for no mistakes rather than a very few. I think biography articles may be somewhat more susceptible to multiple vandalisms within a short period of time if the person is living and has some "anti-fans" for lack of a better word. It seems I just missed it this time. A reminder is good to have on such occasions. Donner60 ( talk) 06:29, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
I am still waiting for a GOOD reason as to why Buck Ewing's death is not allowed in the 1906 death section. Every other MLB Hall of Fame player is listed in their respective years. It seems unbelievably unfair that I could be blocked because I strongly believe he should be listed as well and am therefore persistent. This issue defies logic and reason. I imagine you laughing and enjoying messing with me over this. It almost seems personal, because it absolutely makes no sense that ANYONE should have a problem with Ewing's inclusion. So, without threatening to block me again, can we have a discussion on the topic?
Have you bought up JohnEUnited, Naustin1980, and Michelle d74 to SPI? If you haven't already, I will. It seems pretty blatant to me, due to the edits at Bulldozer archaeology. Apologies if you have, I had an emergency come up and haven't been able to really keep up. -- TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 02:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Trust that no one feels like they're under any pressure; it's upsetting that he feels the need to present Wikipedia in that light, but no one will make concessions to him just because he runs a blog. After all, I blog about Wikipedia too and my opinion carries no more clout than anyone else's. -- TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 23:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have to ask you to strike the libellous comment you made about me on the talk page of Daniel Case. In the section IP at Nina Rosenwald, you said "This IP is pretty obviously and openly anti-Muslim." You make this remark in reference to me, the only IP actively editing that page. I am not anti-Muslim and you have no basis for making such a claim. Your remark is offensive and untrue. Please strike through it. As an admin, you should know better. -- 72.66.30.115 ( talk) 15:17, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Using the term "libel" practically constitutes a legal threat under these circumstances. However, it cannot be libel, as an IP address cannot have a reputation to be defamed. It has to be a specifically identifiable person whose identity is public. In this case your identity remains unknown; being called anti-Muslim on the basis of online statements attached to only an IP address which for all we know may not even be uniquely yours, or even if it is may still be used by others, cannot possibly cause you any real-life harm that you could be compensated for. Doug doesn't even have to make the usual distinction between stating that it's his opinion and stating it as fact (if, indeed, it can be factually proven or disproven to the sastisfaction of a court that someone is prejudiced).
So, the short of it is that while I should at least warn you over the legal threat, I won't because it's a transparently empty one. Daniel Case ( talk) 19:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Already did, thanks. Daniel Case ( talk) 05:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
It seems as though discussions about this BLP may have gone out of hand. I feel like I'm in the wrong for accepting this article in the first place. Was I really? Because I feel like I was. :/ -- t numbermaniac c 12:33, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Bulldozer Archaeology, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
User:Sunray (
talk) 16:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Per your offer at Talk:Islamophobic incidents, please do your magic with Twinkle! Thanks!. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
What do you think should be done about Loomspicker? I've already raised the issue at AN, but nothing was done since he oh-so-conveniently went inactive for a few days. He's clearly a single-purpose account with the agenda of scrubbing the encyclopedia of a word he dislikes, but what, in your opinion, is the best course of action? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 16:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
An IP has just posted on WP:AN regarding this article - you seem to be involved. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug. I know you're interested in the David article. Have you seen this new book by Joel Baden? It's interesting that a figure deemed unhistorical is treated as "the historical David" by a Yale professor. A quick skim indicates the historical record is the Bible. Wish I had time to read this book right now. Maybe you do? Regards, Yopienso ( talk) 17:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm beating myself with hysop to make amends. Enjoy... Haploidavey ( talk) 10:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
This person is edit warring on Satire - predictably, the problem is the word Islamophobia - I have tried to engage in discussion but (surprise surprise) s/he has nothing constructive to say. getting tired, but I don't want to give up... -- Soundofmusicals ( talk) 10:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
By "C&P" I meant "copy and paste." Most of those Serer religion articles' additional reading sections list the same authors, or are just repetitions of things that already appear in the references, and frequently both. These articles are so jacked that there's no way they can be fixed without a total rewrite and access to all of the texts cited, but I don't think that an article that is only half about the Serer religion should have that bloat. Eladynnus ( talk) 14:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
There have been repeated attempts by this user to change the term "Maratha Empire" to "kingdom." I will assume this change is out of ignorance and not page-based sabotage. Therefore, I have provided you with an exhaustive list below of all primary sources that state Emperor Shivaji founded the "Maratha Empire" (not a "kingdom" as you so quaintly put it) in 1674 (note: these sources include both WASP "Westerners" and "Indians", so both perspectives deem the Maratha Empire an "empire" and not a "kingdom"):
Kincaid, D. (1937). The Grand Rebel: An Impression of Shivaji, Founder of the Maratha Empire. Collins. Talwalker, C. (1996). Shivaji's Army and Other “Natives” in Bombay. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 16(2), 114-122. Cooper, R. G. (2003). The anglo-maratha campaigns and the contest for india: the struggle for control of the south asian military economy. Cambridge University Press. Kincaid, C. A., & lavanta Pārasnīsa, D. B. (1986). Comprehensive History of the Maratha Empire. Anmol Publications. Nadkarnia, R. V. (1966). The Rise and Fall of the Maratha Empire. Bombay: Popular Prakashan. Takakhav, N. S. (1921). Life of Shivaji Maharaj: Founder of the maratha empire. Ranade, M. G. (1900). Rise of the Maratha power (Vol. 1). Punalekar & Company. Sardesai, H. S. (2002). Shivaji, the great Maratha (Vol. 1). Genesis Publishing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.181.166.191 ( talk) 05:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the wrong SPI complaint. I did that because this page has been under constant attack by sock puppets. The case against him is more than 3 years old and has no progress because there is no substance. Enough evidence has been given in the court and some of the accusers themselves have been convicted of charges. Unfortunately the media doesn't report this. The way the section is written now looks like a charge sheet more than a wiki article and is an attempt to defame rather than report. In fact the courts and media bodies have warned media of abusive reporting in this case. So relying on media reports too much for negative information is not right.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acnaren ( talk • contribs) 09:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
I just saw your edit, I think, that summary explains the point itself. It may just need a better explanation. Justicejayant ( talk) 10:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
The page contains highly WP:Fringe, Once I made changes into this page, a user "Blackguard_SF"(he has to do nothing with this page nor he discussed anywhere) reverted them, claiming "written like essay", after that, I started re-wording the article so my edits were reverted by Saddhiyama. When I asked for the explanation from Saddhiyama, I actually agreed with a few edits, but this user wants complete removal of all sourced materials that I added, by claiming like "you copied this from old history of wikipedia pages", " [17] is a dead link", and a lot of more childish explanations which has to do nothing with the sourced content or confirm that i coypasted the article. After I took this issue to DRN, this user failed to provide even a single valid argument, and kept telling the same fairy tales like "I forgot which article it was", "Don't know where u copy pasted from, but you copy pasted"... [18]
It seems more like, that the user is assuming Bad faith only for causing trouble. Because if these 2 users assume good faith, they would be thinking of making the page better instead of removing all reliably sourced materials and bringing back to Fringed and unsourced version. I want to make this page a lot better, but these with these 2, i can't. You should contribute here. Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 10:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Could you please take a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Kuba_rugs_and_carpets&action=history -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 18:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Please? and by the way this looks like copyvio and is also unsourced [19] -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 15:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if i am spamming you but could you please take a look here [20] and here [21], thanks. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 17:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Excavation (archaeology) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Llanos de Moxos may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Excavation (archaeology) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Unknown years of Jesus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 08:57, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ali-Shir Nava'i may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 09:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that User:Bless sins had changed the wording in the
Seljuq dynasty article.
[22]
The original text read:
The changed text reads:
My concern is whether this change is plagiarism. This the what the Michael Adas source states;
What are your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Rough consensus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Based on this, I think you may be interested in this: [23] Montanabw (talk) 00:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Akhenaten, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dana boomer ( talk) 17:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
I created a new subpage in your userspace and revised the links so they pertain to you instead of Elockid. Hope you don't mind. [24] You might want to create a new stats page. -- NeilN talk to me 21:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
User:Urməvi and User:HistoryofIran have both been notified of AA2 editing restrictions and juding from the editwarring by the cooresponding IP, I would suspect that is User:Urməvi logged out. [26] -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 04:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
It's a tricky one. The articles are technically OK, although some of the refs may be a bit iffy. I deleted the software article because I couldn't even see a claim for notability, another article has been sent to AFD by someone else. I can't see how Teenfav in its current form can be AFDed. It's got references, not overtly promo and I imagine the viewing figures make it notable. Interestingly, one of her edits was a comment about the promotional nature of a law firm article on its talk page, which led me to delete said article. One to watch, as you say Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
As Wiki advises I began discussing this in the talk page. You have made no attempt to engage me in the talk section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.61.142 ( talk) 09:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Check the recent history. I think the problem with the paragraph is now fully resolved, but this shows how important it is to laboriously dig through the history instead of just reverting the most recent suspicious-looking edit: you have bad edit after bad edit. Especially India-related articles are a mess.
This is why I wish we would implement a simple but radical solution, such as protecting vulnerable articles from IP editing altogether. It's just too much work to vet all these edits, and so nothing gets done, such as actually working on the articles. Instead, they degrade further and further. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 22:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, would you mind my asking your opinion? Is there anything I should be apologising or making amends for in relation to the exchanges here User_talk:Astynax#Inappropriate_remarks, here User_talk:Dkriegls#Inappropriate_remarks, and here Talk:List_of_new_religious_movements#Definiton_of_NRM.2C_or_lack_of_it? Thanks. DaveApter ( talk) 15:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:No paid advocacy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I want to notify you that Turgeis keeps editing government types as User:Izraías and as User:-Ilhador- ( block log). I've just cleaned up his mess. -- Omnipaedista ( talk) 14:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Majority part of most of the copied text was written by me, so I don't think the article should be deleted on the grounds of Copyvio. Even then, if I give credit to those articles, can it be restored? The parts which exists elsewhere are the sections of Decline and Rama. Rahul Jain ( talk) 06:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
It would take me forever to sort it out and Risker agrees that it had to be deleted. You need to recreate it from scratch - you've got a copy in your sandbox, right? Which is again copyvio but I've left it there to be worked on. My guess, given what Risker says at [User talk:Risker]] is that you may need to revise it anyway. Dougweller ( talk) 06:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Because you obviously don't have enough to do as is ;), I would be interested in any comments you might have on the talk page of the above article regarding the revisions of an editor who has admitted being an adherent of the school (which is why he has proposed them) and my own input regarding what seems to me to be the problem of deciding what content best goes where, and how to deal with that concern. John Carter ( talk) 15:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
... my post at RP's talk page. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 03:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
You stated: "I'm afraid it's still WP:Plagiarism - and there is a serious problem of how you are going to meet WP:VERIFY. "I note that you've confused Sadashiv Ambadas Dange, the academic, with Shripad Amrit Dange one of the founders of the CPI", and even if you straighten that out you don't have a source for the statement. You'd do better by trying to get the blog out of your mind entirely and starting a new article finding your own "
Hi I have not confused Sadashiv Ambadas Dange with Shripad Amrit Dange the founder of CPI. It was Comrade Dange (Shripad Amrit Dange) as he was known who availed his press to publish several of Vasudeo Sitaram Bendrey's books. This fact is corroborated in the videos I had posted from eminent Marathi historians such as Ninad Gangadhar Bedekar and Shri Babasaheb Purandare. But these are in Marathi. I plan to rewrite the article because, I did have the blog site holder release all the articles to the public domain but I guess it is not enough. All the articles and video references about Vasudeo Sitaram Bendrey are in Marathi which makes it equally tough to verify for one who does not know Marathi. Is there a way for me to get a reviewer that knows Marathi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaitanya.Errande ( talk • contribs) 21:21, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Nyttend ( talk) 22:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Dougweller, the user Δαβίδ deliberately removes my contributions without reason, contributions non structural, changed a meaning of article. He does not understand what is the Armenian Eternity sign, confused with other symbols, such as Borjgali, and removes the unique photographs of examples of Armenian Eternity sign from Gallery. He also removes entries on the talk page, which is unacceptable. By its non constructive actions, he interferes with the work of other editors. Please warn this user did not remove my editions, and not doing what he do not understand. Vahram Mekhitarian ( talk) 22:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation/Malplaced disambiguation pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
BJP has leaders and politicians from all religions. Stop labeling and calling names it blindly like a paid journalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniash007 ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug, I appreciate your offer to step in if I wanted to let you know about that anon IP adding questionable edits to music pages. It's still going on, just not on the same scale as before. Two articles on 22 October, one on 23 October, all on music pages. The first two were just more of the uncited personnel listings; the one on 23 October was the vandalism that the IP in question had added about 10 times before to that same page ( Sad Eyes). Still no response from that IP - 107.215.236.170
Rockypedia ( talk) 05:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 15:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello!
As you have commented in the past on List of new religious movements, I'm asking you to take a look at the recent activity on the article and the talk page. It seems that some are unhappy with the RfC and are rather attached to a particular outcome. I'm backing off (again) from trying to clean this up (as I don't need to get into an EW over it :/ ), but I do think that an extra set of eyes (and possibly a stern comment) would make a world of difference.Thanks for considering it, cheers! -- Tgeairn ( talk) 20:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/2013 review. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You advised me to go to a talk page to discuss problems with an edit I was making rather than getting into a reverting war. I tried, but was ignored. Not only was my edit undone, but now I see that many of my edits have been undone. I can only assume by you or the other individual who had a problem with me in the first place.
It is this kind of pettiness that is the ONLY reason I do not make financial contributions to Wikipedia when asked to do so. My edits were harmless. But others with power complexes seem to enjoy ruling the Wiki universe with Nazi-like authority. You all win. I give up. I have neither the time nor conviction to press my issues. I wish you all the best. See you on the other side. Twinsdude ( talk) 03:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Just saw your edit at Saraswati. I don't really know where and when did it came, even though I have this page as watchlist. I would like to ask, how it's a copyvio? Did the guy copied from some website, or book? Thanks Justicejayant ( talk) 00:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 20:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I have reason to believe that the article located at Kaijudo was deleted in error. The article was about a collectible card game which ties into Kaijudo (TV series). That article links to Kaijudo at the top as a disambiguation link and near the bottom as a Main Article link, so Kaijudo definitely wasn't orphaned. If the collectible card game isn't notable enough to have an article, then the disambiguation isn't needed and the TV series article should be moved to Kaijudo. Digifiend ( talk) 20:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with the article. I will add sources to the contents.
From time to time I seach Wikipedia for violations of WP:CIRCULAR (genuine citogenesis). Usually I search for three phrases: Hephaestus Books (a publisher making books from Wikipedia articles), ...for Smartphones and Mobile Devices, and MobileReference. I recently deleted all the circular citations that include Hephaestus Books and Encyclopedia for Smartphones and Mobile Devices. I guess I will have to do the same for MobileReference when I get the time. But I have some questions. Why isn't this kind of external links blacklisted. Does anyone pay attention to such policy violations? Are there any other publishers making books from Wikipedia articles besides the ones I know? -- Omnipaedista ( talk) 13:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Babur_and_Ali-Shir_Nava.27i. Now User:Nataev is accusing me of vandalism and is claiming that his version is a "modified intro based on other editors' suggestions". -- Lysozym ( talk) 17:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I can see that this wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atif_Ali_Khan has been created by employing services of worker.
See for this contractor goo.gl/oqG6EA (Please add http:// in front of URL)
See for job posting on goo.gl/MpLkgJ (Please add http:// in front of URL)
All references are not notable and clearly seems to be from blogs that are used to highlight person. Image used on page is sought to be own work however this picture could not be accepted as per wiki terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.178.100.18 ( talk) 03:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Dougweller,
With due respect to Wikipedia Culture, I would like to maintain is as follows:
1) Refer to your reversion of Line 41 Edit by me in the article on Shivaji:
Shahaji, father of Shivaji was a Warrior and had sizeable army under his command, is quite general and the citation supporting as Shahaji being "Leader of a band of Mercenary" seems prejudicial.
The meaning of Mercenary is a person who participates in any conflict for monetary or pecuniary gains. I beg to differ that, this was never a case in respect of Shahaji.
Although, he was warred under various Islami Sultans of his era, I demand explanation as to why the case is made in the main article devoted to Shahaji Bhosale, which is similar to my edit.
Please visit his wiki at /info/en/?search=Shahaji_Bhosale. .
In this article, it is mentioned that, Shahaji was a Maratha General and not a single word calling him a Mercenary Leader.
My objection is related to calling Shahaji a Mercenary, which in good faith policy of Wiki is quite misleading and not serving the purpose for which the Wikipedia is being built to impart non-prejudicial knowledge. However, I shall come up with strong citation to support my objection.
2) In case of reversion of Line 162 Edit: no issues as Senapat and Senapati are one and the same.
3) In case of reversion of Line 190 Edit: no issues as Guerilla Warfare is bracketed under sub-Article Military on bullet 8.
4) In case of reversion of Line 211 Edit: no issues as Kanhoji Angre is being written as Kanauji.
Although new, please inform me about any mistakes I may have made, however note that, I intend no vandalism here. (PS: I read the article Wikilawyering (Humour).
Kindly take note of above, and it is urged in good faith, to consider my explanation in true Wikipedian Sense.
Regards, Ricky141 ( talk) 06:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 29102013, Pune MH India.
Ricky141 ( talk) 12:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks a lot.. Dougweller.. Happy Diwali from Pune MH India.. Ricky141 ( talk) 13:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC) |
...to your email. JamesBWatson ( talk) 13:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me Sir. I'm writing in connection with the List of Christian films, in which you reverted my last edit of an up-coming movie. I want to know why please:
Thanks in advance. Peace.-- Goose friend ( talk) 20:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi again dear wikifellow
After reporting user:Urməvi, Seraphimblade blocked him indefinitely. Therefore, I have started looking for sources to verify and, hopefully, expand the Afshar article. You might take what viable information there is in the Avshar article and merge it with the Afshar article, unless you believe that would be an issue later. What information I can not find sources for will be removed from the article page and placed on the talk page. Let me know what you think. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Doug, I have copied the information from the Avshar article and placed it in the Afshar talk page. You can delete the Avshar article whenever you want. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
OMG I love your halloween navbar. Can I copy it? (and adjust slightly) Is this yours or something one can get generally somewhere?-- 🍺 Antiqueight confer 14:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
🍺 Antiqueight confer 16:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Turns out Elockid already has a Christmas themed navbar ready and waiting - when the time comes I shall be asking him if that's ok to steal too.. Faster than digging out the icons and creating from scratch. I'm not American so there won't be a thanksgiving version. Maybe if I start now I can get a jump on February and March! Though I suspect Elockid is the one to go to for cool themes! I may have to come up with non holiday versions instead...-- 🍺 Antiqueight confer 10:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Best practice guidelines for Public Relations professionals. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
et·y·mol·o·gy ˌetəˈmäləjē/ noun noun: etymology
1. the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history. the origin of a word and the historical development of its meaning. plural noun: etymologies synonyms: derivation, word history, development, origin, source More "the etymology of a word may be unknown"
That what I was attempting to do show the evolution of the usage of the word within the Jewish culture. What was there was untrue unreferenced legitimately, and sub-par to put it charitably. The evidence shows the 1936 Tarbiz article to be outdated and unimportant and barely read in 1936 to begin with. What Josephus called Ashkenaz, on a page about a Jewish historical word, is part of the scholarly method for dissecting a Jewish concept.
Theological bestsellers such as the 2 Christian Evangelical books, deserve a mention in their context, noting how they use the Jewish word, just as an antisemitic racial theory is mentioned, so to an Evangelical usage in proven non-Fiction bestseller form deserves a mention, as I did.
I completely disagree with your statements about my edit. But would like to inquire if I tighten it up, provide clearer sources, and remove the word for word quote from the JE, is how much I care about getting the true history put in the article? Providing precise referenced quotes, would you delete it then? Such as.. Josephus about Ashkenaz, Rashi said this here, Saint Jerome stated such here, and so on with ref brackets for each one with a link to a book and page number where these giants of Jewish history used the term and how they used it, and when, and a scant scholarly interpretation, to glue it together. How can that not be construed as an enhancement to the article? When all you have now is very selective quotation and lack of inclusiveness to the point of dictatorship level censorship.
I did not invent out of thin air the connection to Galatia, for example, Christian authors from as early as fourth Century had, the same can not be said for what was there. Kirk loganewski ( talk) 05:47, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Second major information for you. Information is now about senior wikipedian, This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BiH. He is one of spammer who spam wikipedia by creating spam pages. One of his example is Carter Hargrave which is paid. All of created pages are paid. He is smart and knows wikipedia very well, he add references and external links from clients there to wiki. He do some usual wikipedia stuff as well in between so that you can catch him. Please check his completed jobs on freelancing website (Link provided). Another spammy caught. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.178.100.18 ( talk) 12:11, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Update Update, Update (Save wiki from senior wiki spammers) This user has multiple user accounts, he is involved in deletion of controversies content from Hydroxycut and that was paid too. He changes in such a way that no one can realize it. Check his strange activities on following pages (All paid)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxycut (30 March 2013) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_Hotline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HireJungle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veeam
He challenges that no one is Better than him on wiki, no one has ever caught and no one will. Check that these are non-notable website with poor references. Your Senior Patroller is patrolling his pocket from wikipedia. A successful spammer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.248.35.13 ( talk) 04:26, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, can you help me improve this article, thank you: Heide (sect).-- CanaryIslands ( talk) 20:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Your edit to Template:Indo-European topics has been reverted again following the expiration of the protection you implemented o 12 August 2013. Krakkos ( talk) 23:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. I have effectively reverted a revert of yours, not because I don't trust your judgement but I think you restored the original vandalism by mistake? Helen Online 07:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. Pursuant to the Land of Punt affair, would you mind taking a look at this paragraph to make sure that it's well presented? Best, Middayexpress ( talk) 17:35, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Dougweller! I must inform you that Erim Turukku, blocked yesterday for 24h by you, continued doing precisely the same things as before his blocking, almost immediately after his block expired. How he's reverting at the article Attila, which is as you know a subject to the 1RR limitation. You'll see that he reverted more than once. His overall behavior here is very problematic, he doesn't have a good command of English, and it seems he can't edit here per WP:COMPETENCE... Also, it may be possible that Turukku and User:EMr KnG are the same person. If that's the case, I guess it would be a WP:SOCK case. As you know, in most cases its illegal to have two accounts on WP. And, edits of both Turukku ( [36]) and EMr KnG ( [37]) look really similar. I guess a WP:SPI may be needed, but I myself don't have much experience with such investigations so I'll let you and other admins and editors to decide on it. Cheers! -- Sundostund 19:08, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
My comments about "cut out..." were basically my thought process, showing why I thought that none of the "remaining edits" should be kept. I'm advising you to restore-and-delete them because (1) a G12 deletion for histmerge purposes isn't appropriate, (2) if your last deletion is a G6, anyone would be justified in requesting their restoration, and (3) the contents are copyvios of other Wikipedia articles, so they need to stay deleted, so (4) the deletion log should show that the last deletion was on copyright-related grounds. Is this clear enough? If not, leave me another note please. Nyttend ( talk) 20:14, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Could you look at Iranian people. An edit-warrior constantly reverts my edits. I've explained that the person that he try to delete is an ethnic Pashtun(Iranic) who lives in India but he doesn't care. BBBAAACCC ( talk) 23:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Could you please look at the article of Iranian people? The Indian edit warrior constantly harrasing/annoying me and vandalising Iranian people. BBBAAACCC ( talk) 15:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi you have deleted the entry for Christiane Wyler an artist living in Phuket/Thailand. Looks like due to copyright issues? Please ex[lain me what was wrong with the site as Christiane Wyler is the proper owner of all photos published on that website and as we are just in the process of getting the copyrights registered with wiki commons.
May I asking you to get that created wiki page for Christiane Wyler back?
Many thanks and best regards Christiane Wyler christiane@christiane-wyler.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.52.139.233 ( talk) 02:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Wiki commons has approved the copyrights of all the pictures used in the article about Christiane Wyler you have deleted because of copyright infringements. Got an email from Johan Boss at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that all pictures are marked. May I ask you to put the article back online? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.52.139.80 ( talk) 02:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Wiki commons has approved the copyrights of all the pictures used in the article about Christiane Wyler you have deleted because of copyright infringements. Got an email from Johan Boss at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that all pictures are marked. May I ask you to put the article back online? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.52.139.80 ( talk) 02:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Given several posts above, I've started a discussion at WP:ANI#3 more paid editors?. Dougweller ( talk) 06:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi and thank you for contacting me. I have seen all the messages you have got by an ANONYMOUS users here. I have one retorical question for you: If they know that I receive money for my work, then they also do that because we would meet on hiring website, right? I have tracked his/her IP to India. Do I have to say more? I have never written any article that does not pass at least marginal notability about the things/people I find interesting. If something is wrong, it can be fixed either way. In the end, I advice you that you track those who are hiding behind IPs, not me who contributes to Wikipedia. I am at your service for any questions. Thank you for your time. -- BiH ( talk) 07:17, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I will respond at ANI, but wanted to talk to you first. -- BiH ( talk) 08:23, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I am trying to make a single entry to the Oak Island Theories page but I keep on getting my one line entry deleted either by the automated system of editors, Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SukhwantSinghLongShip ( talk • contribs) 15:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with your redirect of this to the book. It was fine as it was, but I am unable to revert it. There is no other musical titled "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" and you redirected it to the novel, not the 1902 musical (which is called "the Wizard of Oz" NOT "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz"), as you believed. You really should have left it alone. -- Scottandrewhutchins ( talk) 19:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dougweller, any opinion on a DUCK block here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EMr KnG? Mark Arsten ( talk) 19:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I saw your comments regarding the nude photo on the Strippers article. I would think that because the photo shows identifying information from what might be seen as an intimate environment, there is an expectation of privacy. Not, of course, from paying customers but it is different for patrons of a club to see a sex worker nude and something different to have their nude photo be posted on one of the most trafficked websites of the Internet. It is not apparent that the women were even aware that their photo was being taken but even if they were, I'm sure they never expected to see themselves on a page that gets 30K views/month. For all we know, their families and friends are unaware of how they make a living. It seems like this is basic BLP, Wikipedia doesn't allow for paparazzi photos to be used for celebrities and this seems no different.
Plus, I am 100% certain there are photos that exist on the Commons of strippers who are clothed or who we see the back of, instead of a full frontal view. Liz Read! Talk! 20:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Last night I happened upon real fringe stuff being added to this article, and despite warnings, it's still going on. I already reverted twice, and I'd rather not do so again. A. Parrot ( talk) 17:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I now understand the rules and why you have done your edit.
Is there a reason why you removed the quotation from Sacha Stern which referenced the Ketubah at Antoopolis dated to Year 6 of the Shemittah Cycle, Day 20 / Month 9 on the fourth day of the week with a link to 412 C.E. on the Creation Calendar at torahcalendar.com? This sentence was accurately referenced and is scientifically verified by the link to the Creation Calendar proving that there were Jews in Egypt who were observing the calendar in 412 C.E. that had been followed by the Levitical priesthood until the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.61.178.202 ( talk) 18:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear Administrators
The page Khwarazmian dynasty is not suitable to the content of the article. Because the article is not only about the dynasty of Kwarezm Shahs but also about one of the greatest turkish empires of middle ages. For that reason I strongly request you to let me change the title to Khwarezm Turk Empire (Khwarezm Shahs Empire). For further information: http://www.allempires.com/article/index.php?q=kwarezm_shah_empire.
Sincerely ahnenerbe1935 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahnenerbe1935 ( talk • contribs) 19:43, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
User:Nataev has decided that Dilip Hiro is a historian, citing some nonsense fallacy. Apparently he is also going to remove my "unreliable source" tag applied to the Hiro "sources". Would you care to be involved in this? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 06:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Mr.Dougweller, Sir, I had recreated the page relying on the contents of the section, “Can I recreate an article that was deleted in the past?”, of the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion which states that an article that had been deleted but which was a biography of a living person may be recreated if reliable sources are included, and that the biographies of living persons created after 18 March 2010 require at least one reliable source that supports at least one statement about the subject. This is precisely what I had done but by retaining the form of the article that was deleted. I had added reference to a quote “In a later Hindu interpretation, as Ravinder Kumar (2008) says, agni stands for knowledge. The light agni emits is the light of knowledge….” from the Article titled – “An umbilical cord relation with the environment” by Dr. F. Andrew SJ, Associate Professor, Dept. of Commerce, Loyola College, Chennai published in the International Journal of Research in Commerce and Management Volume No.2 (2011), Issue No.11 (November). This fact you do not seem to have noticed.
Previously you had not found the cited book of the subject on the Amazon and therefore you had deemed the subject to be an unreliable source and had readily deleted most of the references to the subject. The same very book and other books of the subject are on the Amazon, and on the basis of the cited book that had then not found favour with you the subject has since been allotted a VIAF number which I had now taken care to mention. Since you have deleted the page you would in the hind-sight now aver that all these new additions are meaningless and not worth any notice. But then, you are a far more experienced administrator and editor, instead of pointing out to me my many faults, shortcomings, and directing me to different guidelines etc. why don’t you practically help me create this page when I have repeatedly failed? Why don’t you re-shape the article? No one stops any editor or administrator from doing that. Are we not here to cooperatively contribute and make Wikipedia grow and gain in strength? You and I at our own levels have already created numerous pages. Do help me by recasting the article and making it acceptable. In fact you will find for yourself that an administrator was actually recasting the previously deleted article to make it presentable just before the delete button was pressed on 25 June 2012.
I thank you for keeping a close watch on my activities. Regards. Soni Ruchi ( talk) 06:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, for Christiane Wyler we received a permission, OTRS ticket number 2013101110004566. Can you have a look at the article and see if you can undelete it? (I'm not an administrator at this project, so I cannot judge if there are other issues.) Kind regards, Jcb ( talk) (OTRS member) 17:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Doug, I left a response to a comment by an editor in the "Survey" section and Bahooka removed it, placing it under the only comment (also by me) in the "threaded discussion" section. I reverted his refactoring and he reverted that. It seems clear that he is attempting to proscribe editor interaction here. I see no hardwired rules on the RfC page regarding this, so what should I do? He has tried to close the RfC prematurely with a false claim of consensus based on a !Vote call that has produced no policy-based rationale or even a single response to any of the policy points I've presented, and now he is trying to preventing me from directly engaging other editors in dialog. I'm inclined to take offense at such conduct at this juncture.-- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 16:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for noticing. I'm afraid I have reason for my edit.
I wrote my editing based on the grammar note, mentioned in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 11th Edition. I copy the entry on "AD" as follows.
AD n abbreviation Anno Domini (used to indicate that a date comes the specified number of years after the traditional date of Christ's birth).
USAGE AD should be placed before the numerals, as in AD 375 (not 375 AD). The reason for this is that AD is an abbreviation of Latin anno domini, which means 'in the year of our Lord'. However, when the date is spelled out, it is normal to write the third century AD (not AD the third century). Compare with BC.
So, based on this entry, I changed all the "AD". On the contrary, BC is written after the year number.
BC n. abbreviation 1 before Christ (placed after a date, indicating that it is before the Christian era). 2 British Columbia (in official postal use).
USAGE BC is placed after the numerals, as in 72 BC (not BC 72). Compare with AD.
That's why I let the "BC"s as they are. I hope you could consider this as a reason why I did all the changes. Thank you for your attention.
Hi, based on your mail, I wasn't able to identify the sanction or user at issue, sorry. If you'd like me to look into it further, I recommend raising the mattter at WP:AE, although I'm not able to edit much the next three days. Sandstein 06:50, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
His version of the Manila article removed any references to the American burning of Manila. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Manila&oldid=581019327#American_Colonial_Period
Whereas in this version. It is clearly stated. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Manila&oldid=580563269#American_Colonial_Period
I'm currently angry at you both for conspiring to have me banned while you two strut around and delete content that makes Americans look bad. This is a very serious breach of Fairness and Neutrality. I would like to discuss this further in a civilized manner. But Im really trying hard to control my temper. Thank You
Gintong Liwanag Ng Araw ( talk) 10:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Gintong Liwanag Ng Araw ( talk) 10:51, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I was writing this last week before the block took effect and now I have to wait a whole week to post this in the talk-page. Read it ok? I am not a vandal who invents things out of thin-air and neither am I an evil person who doesn't want to achieve consensus. My calling of Manila as the City of Man is confirmed by Governor, a Journalist, A University and a Book.
Let's discuss it further in here.
/info/en/?search=Talk:Manila#Manila.2C_City_of_Man_an_explanation
Gintong Liwanag Ng Araw ( talk) 10:51, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I guess I still can't use the tb template properly after six years - or I jinxed it, it didn't make a subject, and got my sig wrong :( Chaosdruid ( talk) 17:52, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I think you reverted me by mistake at Airlines for America. If you look at my edit summaries you will see that I removed the labor relations section because it was unreliably sourced, not because of the bit about A4A supposedly being a union. The original site cited is not available but you can see it through the Way Back Machine. See here. I think it is pretty safe to say that an advocacy site for a labor union cannot possibly be reliable source for this material. Also, you will see that the edit summary you reference is only for the little chunk of text about A4A being a union. See my two edits here and here. Thanks! Intermittentgardener ( talk) 13:27, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
My username "DRGENITALIA" is Mongolian for DanozDirect. I work for a company that makes and designs mops like "The Swivel Sweeper". My pay is extremely low so I decided to work in an office. The Mongolian authorities found out and they prosecuted my family. I had nothing I could do. In Mongolia, it is illegal to switch jobs without a legitimate excuse. I really had nothing to say when the authorities came. I have no house and no place to live. I'm an intelligent person, so I decided to work in Wikipedia. I know there is no pay, but I find it happy to help other people with their work and learning new things. I also appeared on the show "Refuge" where I was interviewed about my journey to America. I learnt English their and now I am a Uni teacher in Physics and a Part Time High School teacher for Geography. I teach the 9th grade. There I also appeared on the show "Go back to where you came from" where again I was interviewed about being a refugee. After that I scraped enough money to go to Australia where I became a reporter for the "Sunday Telegraph" Now I am on my way to visit my remaining family in England and hopefully make it before remembrance day. I am also applying for a job of being a reporter on 7 News. In England I plan to get a job as a Journalist and then hopefully make it to Afghanistan for the show "Refuge" where I am the host. I also realise that my name in English is DrGenital. Sorry for my inappropriate name. Well, continuing on,, after going there I plan to fly to Russia and do a program helping Children learn about Communism. Then I also plan to visit Mongolia and visit my families grave. Now, I just want to help as much as possible with Wikipedia. Sorry for any inconvenience. - DRGENITALIA (AREM ROGEYUZ) DRGENITALIA ( talk) 07:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know that we're in the third and final stage of the RM discussion at Talk:List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible#Requested_move_09_November_2013. I'm sending you this message because you participated in an earlier stage of this discussion. We'd be grateful for your input. Thanks! Oncenawhile ( talk) 08:21, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug
I am Myron Paine, Ph. D., [39] I have advised engineering graduate students. I know the criteria for valid data and the rules for references.
I respect your role to determine that the data is valid and the references are correct for Wikipedia.
Re: Norumbega.
See the Lok map. [40] Norumbega is clearly marked on this map of 1582 by Michael Lok [41] in the location of modern New England.
The Lok map has the names of J. Cabot, 1497 and Jac. Cartier,1535. The rivers and terrain features around Norumbega are similar to the New England terrain today.
Richard Hakluyt [42]b knew what was on the map when he included the map in "Divers Voyages touching the Discoveries of America, London, 1582."
A similar, but better, drawing of Norumbega was made in Rome on a map [43] by Bolognini Zalterij in 1595.
0n both maps Norumbega is as prominent as Canada. I.e. if Canada existed, then so did Norumbega. On neither map is there an attempt to connect Norumbega to Vikings.
So the words, "Inextricably connected with attempts to demonstrate Viking incursions in New England." are misleading. They imply that the name "Norumbega was found by scholars who attempted, but did not succeed, to connect Norumbega to Vikings.
Norumbege was a correctly named location in America before AD 1600 without any indication of Vikings. Today modern scholars have repeatedly demonstrated close valid connections between Norumbega and Vikings in New England:
The French called the people in Norumbega, "Nauset." [3] [4] [If the French silent "t" is not voiced, the word "Nauset" sounds like "Norse."]
The Nauset spoke/speak Old Norse [5] [6]
Many New England place names are Old Norse, including Massachusetts, Connecticut, Narragansett, and Wampanoag, [7] [8]
The Nauset origin stories included ancient migration from Iceland [9] and
The Nauset had/have Norse DNA. See Gene Park in http://lenape-epic.blogspot.com/2012/04/norse-christians-called-lenape.html
The evidence indicates Norumbega was an established Norse settlement in America in 1497. The most knowledgeable scholars of America in 1497 knew that Norumbega was located in what would become New England. Those scholars did not know that the name was associated with Norse.
The names Norumbega and Nauset are not found on English maps after John Smith's voyage in 1614.
Modern multiple attempts to verify that Norumbega was, in fact, a Norse territory have repeatedly produced valid results, which have been ignored by the social scientists.
Ignoring a name and results DO NOT make the name legendary. There is a reason a name is ignored, i.e. maybe to cover up and erase the knowledge that the Norse were in America since 1497 at least.
Then the 17th century English accepted the Columbus was first myth to deny Norse presence in North America. The issues were the Doctrine of Discovery [44] and the English Charters, which stipulated that the English could not settle where there were Christians already, settled. [45]
Any hint that Nauset were in Norumbega was a serious concern for the Puritans.
I think Norumbega should read:
Norumbega (orNorumbègue,Nurumbega, etc.) was a place name for modern New England on the world's maps for 119 years. (AD 1497 - 1616).
In 1616 Robert Clerke drew Captain John Smith's Voyage to Norumbega and beyond.
[10]
Clerke omitted both Canada and Norumbega from the map. Norumbega never appeared on an English map again.
French maps of a century later still show Norumbega near New England.
The French found Nauset (pronounced "Nause") in Norumbega. The Nauset spoke a dialect of Old Norse. Many place names in Norumbega are Old Norse.
DNA studies show that on the northern route into the United States, the Norse people mixed with [American] peoples. That fact is 98.7 percent fact, confirmed by y-DNA.
Have a good one
Myron f — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyronDavidPaine ( talk • contribs) 17:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Daniel
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Mitchell
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).I wasn't sure if I should make another thread at ANI or if you can handle this without all that, since you made a posting in that thread saying you would block if User:BGCTwinsEdit kept uploading images constituting copyright infringement. Today they uploaded two more, despite being told explicitly why their defense didn't work in that thread, as well as on their talk page by another user. [46] The two images uploaded can be seen here [47] [48] LM2000 ( talk) 19:54, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm new to editing wikipedia but browsing over some of the policies makes me wonder what wikipedia actually is and what it presents itself to be.
"Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media" "Its content is determined by previously published information"
One would think that a gigantic encyclopedia would be interested in actual fact, truth and reality. Not just facts or opinions that someone has printed somewhere.
It seems wikipedia is really the "encyclopedia" of what people "think" happened, based on third-party media sources. I guess that's why you call it "wikipedia" instead of "encyclopedia".
I'm having difficulty understanding the verifiability and reliable source policies. I think they are in need of some restructuring.
I don't think i'm going to be a wikipedia editor, but it is a shame that a source of information that many go to seems quick to present the negative, not the positive, and not the neutral it claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonDeva ( talk • contribs) 20:08, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
FYI: new article List of Dalit Hindu saints links to List of Adivasi Hindu saints. Ruby Murray 22:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I was removing that content and you have been adding it repeatedly another user has undone you now. Marchoctober ( talk) 23:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Doug,
You shared a citation you found,
“The Pharos of Alexandria,” Proceedings of the British Academy 30: 277–92
on my talk page. I've been to my friendly local academic library with that citation, and what seems to be going on is that the Proceedings of the British Academy in that era were published as separate monographs, which would have been cataloged by libraries as individual books. Searching the well computerized catalog of my alma mater library didn't turn up a shelf location for this volume. Of course, as I was looking this up, I saw other online references to this source, perhaps some that built the Wikipedia article and some cribbed from the Wikipedia article that cited this source, but I can't say that I have succeeded in verifying this source yet. I am keeping it in a source list document that I always take with me whenever I go to the academic library, and I'll keep trying. Feel free to bring up other research puzzlers as you find. Thanks for your constructive work on the project; it's always good to see another editor who is diligent about seeking out reliable sources. -- WeijiBaikeBianji ( talk, how I edit) 18:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Esc2003 has launched a campaign in the Urartu article to remove any sort of association of the Urartu civilization with that of the Armenian people. In a comment on the talk page of a Turkish speaking user, Esc2003 pointed out that the article was " "too Armenian" (fazla Ermenileştirilmemiş) and that something must be done. Since then, he has tried to make the Urartu article seem as though it is as Persian as it is Armenian. I feel that the only remedy to this is an AE sanction. Don't know of any warnings given to him however. But he has been sent to AE before. Is that not sufficient enough? Proudbolsahye ( talk) 18:57, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
A while back you and I shared the same concerns about this editor ( User_talk:NeilN/Archive_13#Vcorani). Can you please look at today's contributions [49]? They seem to lack the same sort of clue, especially on Cold case review. -- NeilN talk to me 16:57, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Heh, Tom Harrison Talk 21:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Kaveh Farrokh was proposed for deletion and the debate resulted in this entry to be redirected to his publisher. I am concerned about his notability and proposed it for deletion again. -- ,dgjdksvc;jknhg ( talk) 05:18, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
This kind of thing is getting worrisome. Of course it has to claim that the Welsh Annwn appears in an Irish poem.-- Cúchullain t/ c 15:05, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
I am well aware of the Annwn issue and have resolved it. I only put it there in the first place because I was unaware that "Celtic Otherworld" has its own page. -- Bard Cadarn 16 November 2013) —Preceding undated comment added 14:18, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Pashupati seal Does not shows seated ithyphallic. It shows animals surrounding a human. All of 24 tirthankararas are associated with 1 animal. example Lord Mahavir is associated with Lion, Pasarvnath with snake, Rishab with Bull, Shantinath with Deer. The striking feature is that, there is deer below the seat of human (Exactly this is the way jains put one animal as a symbol below the seat of their Tirthankaras). All tirthankars are nude but not ithyphallic like shiva.I saw the similarity hence i disseminated my knowledge of history. I think it is good to have others point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.204.213.43 (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2013 (UTC) Jainism teaches tolerance to other religions but it also teaches to stand for truth. Hinduism and Jainism both originated from Indus civilization and both are as old as history can go. So, how can one say that there cannot be (or must not be) any Jain idol or picture in Indus valley? how can one say that there cannot be roots of Jainism in Indian history/Indus valley? Yes , Pashupati is one of the names of shiva. Hinduism is very popular in India. Can any one tell me if, Hindus place a small icon of animal under the seat/throne of Shiva exactly like this in picture?
As far as the name " pashupati seal is concerned, it was given by a british archaeologist. Probably because Hinduism was very popular and Shiva rides on bull. Also because pashupati is one of the names of shiva. But, this is a modern nomenclature, there is no such name as 'pashupati seal' in brahmi language. It is not the name written on the picture. Therefore i am sharing my knowledge of history. dissemination of knowledge is not a crime...why my posts are deleted with bias? Yes I have been to Kathmandu Pashupati Nath temple and i have seen the idol of shiva. It is different !Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (
talk •
contribs)
The reason for stating the anarchist anthropolist's politics is because the cited observation about the correlation of religion and coinage in the Axis Age is that it is stated in the cited book which is a book of importance to anarchist theory and it enables one to understand from what viewpoint the association of the new philosophies and coinage is made. Cogiati ( talk) 12:53, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Please see Want to be a guinea pig for Flow?. X Ottawahitech ( talk) 17:04, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Young Justice (TV series). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Why this edit? It seems to be fashionable to strike blocked editors' comments, but I have no idea why. Whatever their merits, they were clearly intended to, in their minds, improve the article. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 09:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! Thanks for bringing to my attention that close paraphrasing may have occurred. I stress to students the importance of using their own words and not copying other people's work, even if with minor changes. It would count as a violation of academic integrity and carry a penalty. I will look into it. Also, if you could leave a message directly on User_talk:Tdwyer9532 with your feedback, that would be helpful. I will tell all the students to look at their Talk pages. Finally, if you're interested in being an online ambassador for this course in the future, do let me know (email would be best). Your experience would be valuable to us all. Thanks! Chapmansh ( talk) 13:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but what exactly are you referring to? Cyclonebiskit ( talk) 19:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I hereby declare my apology i was ignorant but my intention was not to spam but to provide some useful info for readers with help of wikipedia and this is to inform you i will not continue to contribute further by providing links.
regards gkrish — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkrish1001 ( talk • contribs) 10:35, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:10, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I question whether full-protection is necessary here. Semi-protection would seem to suffice. I could see full-protecting an article where a run-of-the-mill edit-war was occurring between IP's and registered users, as semi-protection would force the IP's to discuss while allowing the registered users to continue editing. This was a case of a single-purpose IP with an obvious conflict of interest warring with multiple users. Semi-protection would end the disruption while allowing editors to continue to improve the article. Joefromrandb ( talk) 05:11, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Someone off-site pointed to this. I'm finding it hard to assess given that the entire first page of GHits is to their own website(s) (they appear to have several). After clearing that away it's hard to tell how seriously to take it: I found at least one book which compared it to Jediism as a made-up thing. Mangoe ( talk) 12:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Note that in my revisions to the Page on the Genetic history of indigenous peoples of the Americas, I based my citations on European origin on the coverage of the paper in the journal Nature's news article covering the piece -- which mentions "European roots" in its title. ( http://www.nature.com/news/americas-natives-have-european-roots-1.14213) While the material itself is not part of the same peer-reviewed study, the article reflects the authors' interpretation. I tried to cite those views directly in my entry. Overall, the conclusions of the paper seem to be best summarized in the Nature News article in a quote from Theodore Schurr: '“The data from this paper support a single-migration scenario,” he says, but still allows for several sequential ones from the same intermingled Siberian gene pool.'
The concepts of "Europe" and "Asia" are not truly scientific, but reflect a cultural convention. I think "western Eurasia" is technically more precise, but that's not something that's necessarily accessible to most readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A2fnr ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gita Govinda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mithila ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
This editor keeps reverting changes on Jewish diaspora to a version which is framed in non-neutral/POV terms. I've tried talking this out with him, but to no avail. He is not following Wiki guidelines and is now engaging in an edit war. Help is needed. Evildoer187 ( talk) 15:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
FYI, I submitted WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Allenroyboy#26 November 2013.— Machine Elf 1735 06:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you deleted this article. The topic is a real thing [55] [56] [57]; if it doesn't warrant its own article, there may be material suitable for inclusion in the Chevrolet Master article. — rybec 19:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Talk:Royal family SergeWoodzing ( talk) 12:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
How do I go about having an article, that is falsely sourced, deleted? I contacted the editor that created the article, [58] stating that I did not find any mention of Nazaruddin being the architect of the Niujie Mosque. As of 27 November I have not received any response from user:GHYU666, therefore I have decided to have the article deleted. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 07:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rock art may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Doug,
The Constitution Party state affiliation pages that I have been creating (and you have subsequently been deleting and redirecting) have been nothing more than copied code of other CP stub pages that I found and have just updated with current contact information for that particular state.
There ARE plenty of secondary references available for these state affiliates of which the listed state party contacts will soon be adding. The Constitution Party and its many state affiliates has been around for OVER TWENTY YEARS and thus it cannot be denied that it is a notable organization.
Unless you are planning on deleting every single stub page on Wikipedia, I do not think your actions are appropriate.
ALSO, please note that the Constitution Party of West Virginia page began as a stub page created by Ngfan1 on November 13, 2013 and it wasn't until almost a year later (November 7, 2013) that I stumbled across it and began adding the external references - which now number almost SEVENTY (70), by the way.
Please give this some time. Thank you.
- Lexington — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexington62 ( talk • contribs) 18:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Patriotic Nigras. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
An IP user added a well-founded adjective to the article lede. A user reverted it on contentious grounds. I restored the good-faith edit (on solid grounds: the man was merely accused of a crime - one he vehemently denied, and much evidence suggests he may have not committed - and was never tried or convicted of anything, criminal or civil, only charged with the deed by a blue-ribbon panel). Immediately, that edit was reverted; when I restored the original content (and re-stated briefly a stronger case for its inclusion) the original reverter reverted it and slapped an edit war warning on my Talk page. (A most peremptory and imperious gambit. Hey, I've been quietly editing at Wikipedia for going on six years and close to 15,000 edits with less than 2% of my edits being Talk or User Talk, dodging controversy and slogging along.).
No sooner that than another user piled on.
Might doesn't make right, nor does a 2nd user. But it's enough for me to walk away. I don't need the headaches, and Truth isn't the point here, obviously. Wikiuser100 ( talk) 04:42, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
1 Invitation to WikiProject Hotels 2 Promoting some smile 3 A barnstar for you! 4 Wambach article invitation 5 Care to take another pass at the Weetamoo article? 6 Ordering of sections for medical content 7 Disambiguation link notification for May 4 8 Disambiguation link notification for May 20 9 Please discuss 10 Disambiguation link notification for September 29 11 November 2013
I have encountered a "new user" Cobanas that is continuing the removal of referenced information, previously done by an IP. I will be starting a discussion on the talk page of the article, but I would be surprised if this "new user" Cobanas participates. I just thought I would give you a heads up. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments on the talk page of Glastonbury Tor. I've changed the geology as suggested and added a sentence about Hutton's medieval spiral walkway theory. Could you take a look and see if there is anything else you think is needed?— Rod talk 12:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
This article appears to be plagiarized from this book, "Martial races of undivided India", by Vidya Prakash Tyagi, [63]. And, according to User:Utcursch/plagiarism from Wikipedia, this book is copied from Wikipedia. Your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
I have deleted this Moderen Era part of the article because in Philip Edward Jones book only Awan tribe is mentioned.Someone has corrupted the original text of the book by inserting Khokhar/Awan and then pasting it as a reference.You can read the book to verify my claim. ( Kingofjungle ( talk) 21:07, 29 November 2013 (UTC))
my last edit was encountered by you , it was about the "al jazari" i think the reference about his kurdish ethnicity refered to the age he was living in , which was the same time & era that saladin the great was in war with europeans in current palestine (or israel)& he was ruling over the middle east i'm wondering why you removed a resourced article! when we are talking about some one , we have to tell people that what ethnicity he was from... for example alexander the great was a greek from macedonian ethnicity , etc al jazari was living in an kurdish habbited area ( diyar bakir ), the common language in that era was arabic , even persians & turks used to write & read in arabic it is not necessarily mean's that he was an arab please let the article be as the way it was ... thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobanas ( talk • contribs) 13:39, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug. An editor with a COI, Brian Josephson, has recently been contributing to
Talk:Water memory. In my opinion, his behavior has recently become tendentious. See, for instance,
#Pollack's water conferences, where he has advocated for the inclusion of unsourced content, saying "A Bayesian analysis indicates that any source I produce would be declared 'not RS' with high probability. Accordingly, I will not use up any of my valuable time looking for one.
" I think it may be appropriate to let him know about Arbcom's discretionary sanctions for pseudoscience, but I'm not an admin, so I can't post
the template. Could you take a look, when you get a chance, and post the template if you feel it is appropriate? There's no major rush, I'm just hoping this will head off future issues. Thanks. —
Jess·
Δ
♥ 16:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_basques10.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.174.135.252 ( talk) 21:05, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest limit. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)