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.

Hi, I have asked for a move review, see Wikipedia:Move review#Anti-Semitism, pertaining to Anti-Semitism#Requested move. Because you were/are involved in the discussion/s for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page/topic, you might want to participate in the move review. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 09:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi RolandR,

Some IP editors have taken to disruptively editing the page about Students for Justice in Palestine. Do you think this warrants temporary page protection?

Cheers, Sindinero ( talk) 13:23, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Probably not yet. So far there does not seem to be significant disruption. Keep watching this, and if it continues it may become necessary. RolandR ( talk) 13:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Will do, thanks! Sindinero ( talk) 15:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

A case ( Palestine-Israel articles) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee -- S Philbrick (Talk) 15:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi -- I didn't see an edit summary explaining why you were deleting another editor's entry on my page. Perhaps there is an acceptable explanation, but normally that is not allowed (though I'm allowed to delete the entries of others on my page, and in time would have likely deleted that one). Just checking in -- perhaps there is a special circumstance that allows you to delete that text by another editor. (If there is, btw, it would be helpful to mention it in an edit summary the next time). Tx. -- Epeefleche ( talk) 09:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, that was entirely accidental. I had a network failure, and was aware that something had gone wrong when checking another editor's contributions. But I couldn't see what happened. Please accept my apologies; I did not intend to do this. RolandR ( talk) 09:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

No worries. Happy editing. Best. -- Epeefleche ( talk) 09:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • English signup
  • Deutsch signup
• Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
• Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
• British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
• Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
• Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
• JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
-- The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Hello, RolandR. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria ( talk) 19:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for putting the latest SPI together Roland. It was fairly obvious to a few editors that the new account wasn't that of a new editor. I looked at the edit histories of a few articles on the account's contribution list, but couldn't see any recently blocked editors listed, so, was stumped as to the identity of the socketeer myself.     ←   ZScarpia   23:06, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps paranoia has set in, but there's something about this account which doesn't look quite right to me.     ←   ZScarpia   20:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Unlike the other accounts, this is certainly not an SPA. The user has been editing since May, and although this may be a POV editor, they do not appear to be edit-warring. I don't think this is another sock. RolandR ( talk) 21:58, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. As you say, the account's not an SPA.     ←   ZScarpia   22:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

There is a straw poll that may interest you regarding the proper use of "Religion =" in infoboxes of atheists.

The straw poll is at Template talk:Infobox person#Straw poll.

-- Guy Macon ( talk) 09:35, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

I think this was intended for the edit summary field, and wasn't supposed to be entered in the article -- correct? Regards, Xenophrenic ( talk) 19:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I have a browser problem, and my cursor frequently returns to the top of any page or form. Usually I manage to catch it. Sorry for any disruption! RolandR ( talk) 21:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The individual you warned here is posting a malicious site that is blocked by my firewall. He should be blocked immediately. Serendi ^pod ous 18:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• Elsevier - science and medicine journals and books
• Royal Society of Chemistry - chemistry journals
• Pelican Books - ebook monographs
• Public Catalogue Foundation- art books

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
-- The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Sorry not to have followed protocol in editing the "Elizabeth Barrett Browning" wiki page. However, my edit was correct. Endnote 22 was written by Jennifer Kingma Wall, an MA candidate at Rutgers University (article copied below). I did not intend on vandalizing the page; I only wanted to give credit to the proper author.

^[1]

Mpwall1 ( talk) 12:25, 2 January 2015 (UTC)Michael

Hi Roland, just FYI, I have an incomplete list of proxies used by our mutual friend at User:HJ Mitchell/93. As I mentioned at the SPI, the ones I dealt with in December were geolocating mainly to South America (Paraguay, Peru, Argentina, Venezuela, though interestingly not Brazil or Chile...) and a few to Spain. I don't generally edit articles in the topic area given that I'm active in enforcing the discretionary sanctions so feel it best to remain above the fray, so if you spot any suspicious-looking edits from IP addresses like that (and my list might make for useful comparison), could you let me know? From a pragmatic point of view, I'd be inclined to leave him alone if he was editing anonymously and not causing any problems, but alas he insists on coming back to the same edit wars time and time again. Vagueness is deliberate per WP:BEANS/WP:DENY. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I just read your user page. You are highly deserving of respect. I thought I should let you know. Mbcap ( talk) 19:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

I got it too. Classic case of dick-size anxiety syndrome. You are semi-protected for a couple of weeks, let me know if you'd like it extended or removed. Zero ^talk 11:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it's Runtshit. Far more characteristic of JarlaxleArtemis. RolandR ( talk) 11:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Agree. Young J. has been very active lately. I have my talk-page permanently protected now, you really should ask for the same: saves a lot of time. Huldra ( talk) 22:42, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I'd be happy to oblige if that's what you wanted, Roland, but the way I look on his visits to my own talk page is that it keeps him away from anywhere where he can do real harm. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:17, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I think we should make things as difficult as possible for him and other vandals. In fact, I'd like to see nearly all pages permanently semi-protected, in order to deter vandals. RolandR ( talk) 23:46, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

@ RolandR:hii i saw that you had tagged viabletype for deletion but Lmoia17 removed tags multiple times even after warning without any proper reason or discission. so please take appropriate response according to wikipedia guidelines. i am a new patroller so i wanted your help and please check this page also if you don't mind Ché Aimee Dorval thank you :).-- Nicky mathew ( talk) 02:00, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dave Hill (professor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Left Unity. 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) 09:00, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe the user thinks he is on some quest to right the wrongs he sees on wikipedia and rid it of its 'liberal' bias. It isnt just on the Marx pages, its on a lot of pages. His talk section is a testament to that. The disruptive edits, edit warring, pointy and agenda driven inserts don't stop. A ANI report had been filed before, but it appears nothing has come of it. Is there anything else one can do? - Xcuref1endx ( talk) 23:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Roland, I wondered if you might be willing to take a look at William Schabas? It seems he's recently resigned from a prominent UN post for undisclosed support for the PLO and the article is attracting some unwelcome attention. It could do with some attention from people more knowledgeable on the issues if you have time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:52, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a look later when free of domestic responsibilities. RolandR ( talk) 21:39, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Just curious why the update to other_name edit on Andes keeps being reverted. I'm probably just not familiar with the subject enough to know why that's wrong. — Strongjam ( talk) 00:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree I know that topic and I am not making bad edits These are not distruptive edits and I can make them. TheWhovoanBoss ( talk) 00:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

If you think "The Andes Mountian (sic) Range" is an alternative name for the Andes, please cite a reliable source confirming this. RolandR ( talk) 01:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I can't believe I didn't see the misspelling. Anyway, I'm not sure I see the need for it anyway. — Strongjam ( talk) 01:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

The example is weird, because Type 1 error occurs when the null hypothesis is true, but the data turns out to reject the hypothesis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnylioltu ( talk • contribs) 03:06, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello RolandR, You left a message and undid some of the edits that I did for Kathy Freston. I am a bit confused on all of this as she has been divorced from Tom Freston for over a year (there is not an article on this, but if this page/site is about accuracy, then the update should be left), her birthplace is incorrect on the page as it is Greenville, not Atlanta, and the information currently on the page " Tom Freston was largely responsible for her visibility, as Kathy Freston has no formal training or expertise in nutrition or biology. Tom was an executive at Viacom in charge of MTV Networks until 2006" has no citation or reference either and is all hearsay and therefore not credible, if you are saying that what I wrote is the same definition.

I have emailed Ms Freston on the past and got the response from her, "tried to share my life’s experiences that led me to this journey in my books. I don’t have any special education or especially relevant background, beyond the fact that I’ve found these topics to be engrossing. I've become somewhat of an obsessed researcher on the subject of plant-based food and all its healthy repercussions!" so that would seem to me to be a better source then someone else's apparent gossip, as stated in the current page.

It seems a bit shady to me that there is all this talk of her ex-husband, especially skewed in his direction, coming from articles written about him, on her page. I feel her page should be about HER and his articles can go to his Wiki page.

The Charlie Rose link is no longer active so why was it restored? This makes no sense to me and I am not sure of your interest in all of this?

Thank you, Walt P. Waltypete ( talk) 22:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

The text you added had no source, and is unacceptable in a biography of a living person. An email that you claim to have received from the subject is unfortunately not considered a reliable source. If you think that other material in the article is also inadequately sourced, please remove it, or ask for a better source; but the existence of unacceptable material in an article does not authorise the addition of further such material. RolandR ( talk) 00:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

.

Dear Roland, wait a little please, I'll give you a link from the NASA Web site! Rohlinae ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsearch/SEsearchmap.php?Ecl=18510728 This is the source! The day of birth of Samuel Sachs for example Rohlinae ( talk)

Nobody is questioning whether he was born on the day of an eclipse. The issue is, is that significant? You can only include this if a reliable source makes the connection. Otherwise, your own linkage is considered unacceptable synthesis, and is not allowed in Wikipedia.

Your further comment, complaining that I have not responded within five minutes of your original comment, is also unacceptable, and I have removed it. RolandR ( talk) 15:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok, maybe you are right! Thank you for your reply! Astrology is not a science I know, but this is an interesting fact to create a new category to facilitate the search of the people born on a total solar eclipse day. It's so interesting to know it, why not? Like in Ancient Greece for example the fact of birth on such a day was considered very important. Rohlinae ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:26, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I reverted back this rollback because the section is essentially POV, for the reason I've previously described in the last edit and I've repeated in this one. Regards. Lenore ( talk) 21:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

a woman who reports being raped is not a rape victim. these infos are tendentious. please stop your vandalisms Lenore ( talk) 10:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

My edits are certainly not vandalism; maybe you should read the page to see how Wikipedia uses the term. And my starting point is to take seriously allegations of rape, not to follow a repressive regime in stigmatising and criminalising the complainants. RolandR ( talk) 11:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:31, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, RolandR. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello RolandR, as you wrote to me, I can see that you removed my last edit. As I belive, regardless to my political views, the term 'occupied territories' is not accepted by all. Therefore I belive that writing the 'west bank' will be better alternative than the 'occupied territories'. BTW, the Israeli alternative is Judea and Samaria and not the west bank, but I chose to use the trem the 'west bank' as compromise. This expression is guaranteed to all and politically correct. Please change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ברעזרא ( talk • contribs) 03:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC) ברעזרא ( talk) 03:51, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The article originally included a citation from a book by Israeli legal academic David Kretzmer,The occupation of justice: the Supreme Court of Israel and the Occupied Territories. You altered this to The occupation of justice: the Supreme Court of Israel and the west bank. This is utter falsification, and I fail to see how you can justify it in any way. Similarly, the article included a statement from a B'Tselem report describing restrictions in Hebron as "among the harshest in the Occupied Territories". You altered this to "among the harshest in the west bank", maintaining the attribution to B'Tselem. This again is falsification of the source cited. There are more examples of your falsification of sources in these edits. Your personal preference does not take precedence over the actual usage by the sources cited. And in any case, the term "occupied territories" does not refer only to the West Bank, but to all the areas occupied by Israel in June 1967, including also the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Your edit introduced deliberate errors into this article, and you would be well-advised not to repeat such behaviour. Of course I will not revert my edit. RolandR ( talk) 10:13, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I didn't noticed that I changed originality quotes. It wasn't my purpose. But on the other way, the term 'occupied Territories' Indicative of particular political view. Therefore, this term should replaced with the term 'west bank'. As long as it doesn't change originality quotes of course.

ברעזרא ( talk) 16:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

You changed the title of a book by accident? Yes, sure, whatever... RolandR ( talk)

I was just trying to be nice and explain to you the source of this mistake. I do not understand why you do not believe it, and actually, I don't really care. The only thing that I do care is using the right expressions in this free encyclopedia.

ברעזרא ( talk) 01:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

למה אתה נגד ישראל?

ברעזרא ( talk) 01:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

?למה אתה בעד נישול ודיכוי RolandR ( talk) 07:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

אני לא. ברעזרא ( talk) 22:09, 16 May 2015 (UTC)