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 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | → | Archive 20 |
I linked to the Talk page discussion that I started in my edit summary, the one titled "Men and women" vs "males and females". I have no problem with the current version, but I am just curious why you think men and women is better than males and females? I do not care either way, I am only asking out of curiosity. DimensionQualm (talk) 05:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi EvergreenFir. The 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting has been added to List of Islamist terrorist attacks and List of Islamist terrorist attacks in developed countries. The inclusion scope of both articles is "Terror attacks by Islamist extremists to further a perceived Islamic religious or political cause". Do you think that the sources (which I know you're very familiar with) support inclusion of the Orlando shooting in these list articles? - MrX 21:16, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ 01:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Unrelated, just saving you some TOC space. Do community colleges offer courses in Wikipedia Editing? ―Mandruss ☎ 03:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
This comment is related to a recent edit of yours of the Orlando shooting article. Having studied LGBT studies of various sorts for more than a quarter century, I can personally assure you that LGBTs is an accepted term. See, e.g., [1] and [2]. Just so you know. Antinoos69 (talk) 07:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Imelda Marcos. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Clearly it is a viewpoint of "positive" regarding people who consider themselves white. How can you dispute that? Are you misreading my edit as if it were suggesting racism is positive in general? That's the only rational alternative I can think of. I see the racist former edits of the page, but man - actually read the edit. White pride is taking pride in being white, mostly used by racists. This goes WITHOUT QUESTION.
Return my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike13815 (talk • contribs)
The Current Events Barnstar | ||
For your efforts on Omar Mateen. Keep it up. I'm sure there's more controversy to come. TimothyJosephWood 00:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC) |
Eh, I try to be polite. :) Trivialist (talk) 01:43, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For all of your tireless work in important subject areas that demand attention, as well as extensive involvement most everywhere else! GABgab 21:46, 24 June 2016 (UTC) |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Catfish and the Bottlemen. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I edited without logging in under IP 76.84.23.253, can you please take your reason for your revision of Stonewall to the talk page? Much appreciated. DoomLexus (talk) 02:16, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello there! You are invited to attend the Great Buckeye Wiknic in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, July 10th from 1:00 to 5:00 PM! Join us for a day in the park for food and socializing with others from the Wikimedia movement. We'll be meeting up at Fred Beekman Park, a park on Ohio State University's campus.
If you're interested, please take a look at our events page for more information, including parking info, food options, and available activities. If you plan on attending, please add your name to the attendees list. We look forward to seeing you!
If you have any questions, feel free to leave one on my talk page. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
(Note: If you would like to stop receiving notifications regarding Wikimedia events around Ohio, you may remove your username from this list.)
Hello! Would you consider removing the AfD on Chris Gilmour? I agree that in its initial state for the Afd that it was lacking in eevry way. However after researching his work extensively I came up with many, many good references, which are now in the article. In my view there is not a chance that something this well-sourced would be deleted; with the added refs the reasons for the AfD are clearly gone as well.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 18:15, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Evergreen!
In Columbus Ohio, several members of Wikipedia Connection are forming the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Our goal is to expand our efforts beyond Columbus to create an organized group that promotes Wikipedia, puts together events, and forms a better local community here in Ohio. We'd love to have you on-board as one of our founding members! Being a part of the user group will allow easy communication between active Ohio editors, notifications of upcoming events in the Ohio area, and, if you're interested, the opportunity to help organize events such as edit-a-thons or workshops. If our User Group is approved in time, we plan for our first event to be a Wiknic in early July.
If interested, feel free to add yourself to the list at the bottom of our page on Meta. Also feel free to contribute to the page itself, or ask any questions you may have. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:24, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
You may have missed some on the RFC—I've noticed that most of the redlinked usernames above what you just tagged have either been resurrected or are very new. Same goes for IPs. Dschslava Δx parlez moi 00:23, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
I was just about to start looking through this when I saw the effort was well underway. Good diligence. TimothyJosephWood 01:39, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
I was scared to click on the notification I just got, because I was worried someone reverted me and I really wasn't in the mood to deal with it at that second. I was soo relieved to see it was you "thanking" me. :) Do you think it's the kind of thing that can be erased permanently so it's not in the article history? And what's the page called where you can ask someone to remove that kind of stuff? I can't remember what it's called. Thank you! —PermStrump(talk) 04:45, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
On the additions in question, extensive references have been added and all this content is copied from other wikipedia EN articles which have been heavily discussed. Please post in talk page before removing cited, valid content. Thank you.PolarYukon (talk) 21:14, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Order of Friars Minor. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
This looks suspiciously like block evasion by 68.187.108.155 given the similar contributions.[5] --AussieLegend (✉) 08:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I assume congratulations are in order so, congratulations. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:14, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi, since we interacted on the article White pride, I'm reaching out to you for an opinion. It has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The reassessment raises the questions of sourcing; neutrality; and level of detail present in the article. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz. I've seen you edit controversial topics with balance and NPOV, and I would value your opinion on this matter.
I would welcome input or a review of the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would appreciate any feedback you could share. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I really appreciate your thanks on my edits on The Adventures of Paddington Bear. I find it so embarrassing that the IP user thought the show was an American co-production. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 03:37, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I'd encourage you to try to join the Wikipedia:Meetup/Columbus/Wiknic/2016 on Sunday, there are quite a number of interesting and friendly Wikipedians attending (including some travelling from far away) I think you'd enjoy getting to meet.--Pharos (talk) 03:38, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Michel Foucault. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
You erased my "Talk" claiming "This is not a forum to discuss racial inequality."
What??? Are you insane? How much more relevant could it be?
Your ignorance is overwhelming!
This is why I hesitate to participate more often.(The shaman poet (talk) 06:42, 12 July 2016 (UTC))
Hi Evergreen. I think that was to avoid repetition. --Peaceworld 06:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
The changes made to the Dektor Counterintelligence and Security page were in no way vandalism. What was removed was a largely fictitious section falsely supporting claims of an association between Dektor Corporation and Dektor Counterintelligence and Security, and many other false claims made on the Dektor Corporation website (www.dektorpse.com). The changes include a link to much more detail relating to just a few false claims made by Dektor Corporation. The original company (Dektor CI/S) was started by my father and ultimately went bankrupt, later Dektor Corporation (similar name) started selling a reverse engineered piece of equipment (named it the same) (selling is legal because the patent had expired) but making claims about his new device that were related ONLY to the old device. Please leave the restored changes intact. NOT VANDALISM! - Dirk Bell, bellda2005@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18C:C201:D924:555D:9FE2:73B2:658C (talk) 03:11, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
I already posted a link to news sources confirming this information before your last ridiculous editing of my post. So its not a problem. Dream Focus 20:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi, you're not new, and the page is tagged as BREAKING NEWS, so, in light of WP:RAPID your repeated comments (first comment: [6], urging deletion of 2016 shooting of Baton Rouge police officers seem like a waste of your time - and that of other editors. Maybe better to just make a note to yourself to revisit later.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:37, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of mascots. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
The comments made by Clippers18 on User talk:Clippers18 seem very similar to those made by 68.187.108.155 on his/her talk page. Given that 68.187.108.155 was blocked on 28 June and Clippers18 didn't start editing until 6 July, it seems very likely that they are both the same editor. We know that 68.187.108.155 has evaded his/her block in the past, and Clippers18's edits started the day after the last IP stopped editing. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey! How exactly do you create a talk page archive? I can see you have such archives and I would like to make some of my own, since I just noticed my own talk page is getting a bit unnecessarily stuffy. Is it simple? Or do I have to go through a whole process? Thanks! Parsley Man (talk) 02:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
My bad... I was watching the recent changes for vandalism and his the button too quickly. My apologies on reverting your talk page :) --KevCor360 01:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevCor360 (talk • contribs)
I was going to report that IP for the 3RR violation too, but it seems you beat me to the punch while I was trying to figure out the reporting process for the first time. Kudos to you. :P Parsley Man (talk) 01:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of WWE Intercontinental Champions. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Just something I noticed while cleaning up Jennette McCurdy's filmography – your AWB-assisted edits to convert the episode list table code to the template have broken a few tables due to a typo (|aux2
instead of |aux2=
). I have fixed the ones related to Mad TV. You might want to check if you happened to make the same mistake on other articles. nyuszika7h (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
The talk page is locked down, so I can't make an edit request there, but these two diffs: [8] [9] seem to go against the consensus formed on both the talk page and the NPOV noticeboard. Would you mind having a look?142.105.159.60 (talk) 16:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
The whole point of assuming good faith is seeing an edit that isn't clearly appropriate and going, "Well, maybe I'm just missing something." I transcribed that request onto Talk:Anita Sarkeesian knowing full well it was going to get denied, but that section on WP:RFPP isn't just for edit requests I think will pass muster. Per the evidence you gathered, it's really obvious that editor is User:Comet Egypt and the IP deserves to get the hammer. You did the right thing hatting that thread. RunnyAmiga (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
On 3 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Shawshank tree, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the iconic 180-year-old tree from The Shawshank Redemption fell in July 2016? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shawshank tree. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 13:07, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
You reverted the edit in the circumcision article referring to a study published in the Royal Society of Medicine on the basis that the source did not comply with Wiki standards. According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2014 impact factor of 2.118 on what basis then do you consider it does not live up to standards for medical sources?
Tyreric (talk) 08:50, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
I don't see how my edit was unconstructive as I merely pointed out a redirection and added more pages and articles of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mateoski06 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Orange County. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm new here and I was trying to edit the circumcision page. At first, I linked some articles which expressed some very plain information about the sexual side-effects of circumcision from a peer-reviewed article. But then I found out I can only cite secondary sources. I see the argument there, research papers can be fallible as they are basically pieces of new information.
It seems very unethical to me to not show both sides both for and against circumcision with regard to adverse affects. I would like to give both sides of this debate fair representation. Of course, I wish to express the other side in the proper fashion.
So, as I'm new, I'm not really sure what sources I need to find. I felt they were sufficient before but I was wrong. For example, I felt this was sufficient:
" The foreskin contains specialized sensory tissue that is removed during circumcision. Some men believe that the end of the penis becomes less sensitive when the foreskin is removed and that sexual sensation may be decreased.[1] "
as the uptodate.com is" the premier evidence-based clinical decision support resource, trusted worldwide by healthcare practitioners to help them make the right decisions at the point of care. It is proven to change the way clinicians practice medicine, and is the only resource of its kind associated with improved outcomes.", I feel this is a sufficient secondary source. Is there any reason why this statement would not be acceptable if I submitted something like this again?
Apologies again, I'm not really sure how wikipedia works as I'm new. Lots of people get information from this site, I feel it is only right to give people both sides of the story.
References
((cite web))
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
The irony isn't lost on me that a misunderstanding over these scientist articles has probably helped them out quite a bit. You find yourself helpful in ways you don't even mean to be. TimothyJosephWood 21:35, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
This is just a notification to a series of discussions that are taking place regarding updates to MOS:TV, given you participated in the discussion and/or expressed interest in the discussion seen here. You can find more information about the initiative and the discussions, here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:35, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey! I'm going to need your help in making sure this poorly-sourced edit does not make it in the 2016 Milwaukee riots article. The user in question has pushed for its inclusion before (it actually got him banned for 31 hours as a result) and I am now discussing it on the talk page. I would very much appreciate any assistance I can get, because I don't like the WP:POV manner of that edit. Thanks! :D Parsley Man (talk) 19:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox organization. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Re: [10]
My section heading was incorrect and misleading. Apparently some feel that the perp should be in the list, as was done in articles like Sandy Hook and VA Tech, and Mateen is listed at the end of the prototype box. I don't particularly care one way or the other, but I would hope we could avoid a big debate about it. Assuming he stayed, what would your suggested box title be? My rationale for the single word was "don't state the obvious", but I can see the view that it's awkwardly terse, and I'm flexible on that point.
I ask because I'm going to restart the poll with an uncollapsed box, and I'll change its title as well.
Or, given your comment, Sum up the content sufficiently so the reader could choose to expand the list or not.
, would you be ok with "Killed" if the box were not collapsed? ―Mandruss ☎ 22:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, you kindly weighed in on a previous RFC Talk:Antisemitism_in_the_United_States#RFC_-_Antisemitic_incidents which I am trying to use as precedent for a similar issue on another page where I am meeting resistance and an apparent lack of engagement with the relevant wikipedia policies. It would be helpful if you could weigh in on the issue at Talk:Antisemitism in 21st-century France#Don't just list incidents. Thanks. -Dan Eisenberg (talk) 20:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello EGF, I just wanted to take a minute to say what a nice catch that was, recognizing the pattern of what turned out to be the mixed result of a Wikibomb event. I think you and the others involved in the ANI discussion are handling the matter in just the right fashion needed in order to attempt to maintain those new volunteers while also cleaning up the content that is not policy-consistent. The truth is, we really need new editors, not just in general, but in this area in particular. So I hope you manage the clean up while encouraging, rather than discouraging, those new potential editors--and I think you are all approaching the matter in exactly the manner which gives the best chance of that outcome. Anyhow, if not for the fact that I am exceptionally busy this week, I'd like to offer a hand with that important effort, but I figured at the very least I could give a shout-out/show of appreciation.
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
For an exceptional application of scrutiny in recognizing a problematic addition of inter-related content and then a calm and considered investigation of the cause. Snow let's rap 23:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC) |
@Parsley Man, Mandruss, and Dan Eisenberg: Sorry about the long delay. I just got internet back at noon today. My mobile carrier doesn't have data out here either, so I was mostly offline for the past 4 days. I am still unpacking and all, so I might not be very active until next week. I will try to address your messages soon. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beauty Pageants. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Why do you cite BRD, revert, then not discuss? Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 20:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Discussing race can be a bit stressful, so I think a little chit chat helps. I notice from your user boxes that you're genderqueer. What is that exactly? I've never heard of it. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Your AWB edit to Boy Meets World (season 1) broke the ratings table (though it was commented out anyway, so no big deal). I fixed it. The other seasons don't seem to have been affected. nyuszika7h (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Because you have participated in a previous RFC on a closely related topic, I thought you might be interested in participating in this new RFC regarding Donald Trump.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I had another thought after I closed the discussion you opened at ANI. Assuming you want to keep track of these IPs, it might be better if there are future problems to create a new SPI with just the IPs. If you want to throw in a reference to the Maelbros SPI to give it some background, that'd be fine. That way, annoying CheckUsers like me wouldn't close them as I did at the Maelbros case, and you'd therefore be more likely to get some remedial action. Regards.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:31, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of European countries by average wage. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Good day, I have created the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Dan_Eisenberg case, of which you may be interested, since you were a participant in his RfC in the Antisemitism in the United States article. Please weigh your opinion in that COI case. Thank you! -- 178.121.228.214 (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
There is a VPP discussion about distinguishing between terrorist attacks and non-terrorist attacks, if you would like to participate. Parsley Man (talk) 04:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Because you do such good work tracking all these vandal people. And because I didn't have to bake it, because that would, you know, require effort. :-) Katietalk 21:32, 31 August 2016 (UTC) |
I fail to see how content is "defamatory" when it is truthful and does a valuable service of warning the public about the sketchy business dealings of a sharp firm.
All you moderators know how to do is complain about anything and everything that didn't come out of your own little heads. Heck, I understand: I was a sys admin when I was sixteen, too!
By the way, it's considered mature to use your own name as your login, not some nonsense like EvergreenFir. Be proud of your work and advertise your identity--unless you have a clear reason to hide.
2601:581:300:FB5:D5FB:9DFF:2EE5:6063 (talk) 20:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, you seem quick to redact a copyvio, but slow to admit your POV isn't an academic consensus. Could we get your view on that? Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 19:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eritrea. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Just letting you know I have undone your obvious error and poor judgement on the Hillary Clinton article. [11] No biggie. I'm not offended and I don't take it personally. But please, do be more careful in the future EvergreenFir, with your hasty reverts and then slapping it on my talk page. I don't see how you could have possibly interpreted it that way, but you obviously thought you knew best, and we all make mistakes don't we. Best wishes.Charlotte135 (talk) 12:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
any gender-related dispute or controversy" broadly construed. She's been the target of gender-based harassment and her current campaign has as well. At least that's my opinion on it. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:55, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, EvergreenFir. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 15:21, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian, as you did at User talk:NeilN. (talk page stalker) CrashUnderride 18:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ride the Lightning. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh hey there, I was wondering if you could add the Start date and age template from the current "|firstdate = August 1, 1968" to {start date and age|1968|8|1} to correspond to Weekly Shōnen Jump's first publication date? I'd normally ask for an edit request myself, however, the talk page is also protected unfortunately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.45.29.72 (talk) 22:54, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm having problems with another user on Talk:The Bachelor (season 21) and I was hoping you could help me with it. The users name is Starbucks6789. After both of us reverting each others edits back and forth, I went to the talk page and I don't seem to be getting anywhere. Could you please help resolve the discussion? 74thClarkBarHG (talk) 00:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
I am a relatively new user. If you could, please explain and let me know why you flagged that edit as vandalism.
Edit: Forget it. If moderators are going to use bias as a reason to flag someone with vandalism in those types of articles, I'll just stay out of articles all together. Firehawk31329 (talk) 21:27, 15 September 2016 (EST)
You are invited to participate in the talk-page run-off voting for the lead picture at Donald Trump. --Dervorguilla (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at 2016 Minnesota mall stabbing shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
You've deleted that Africa info at least twice times now XavierItzm (talk) 22:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
The article Shooting of Terence Crutcher has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 23:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Hey, EvergreenFir. If you'd rather that I not ping you to disputes I'm involved, such as this one and this one, especially those concerning gender matters, just let me know and I will stop doing that. I want to go ahead and be clear that I'm open to your opinions differing from mine. I don't expect you to always agree with me. If some of these cases are simply cases you'd rather not weigh in on, for whatever reason, I understand that too. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:29, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Galway United F.C.. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
You say this is appropriate for WP:ANI when previous attempts in other venues have failed. Why then do you say my post to ANI is disruptive editing? 86.136.230.56 (talk) 06:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Doug and I together blocked your Dancer. I assume there will be more on the SPI; I left a note on the ArbCom mailing list as well. One of the IPs pointed to another sockmaster, but I think that was a false trail. Take care, Drmies (talk) 19:35, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
I can't believe that in 2016 a racist is writing about race. Was the racist trying to claim races are not equal? Obviously they are equal. Anyone who says otherwise is a racist. QED. Racists just don't understand logic. The racists Richard Chepstow (talk) 13:27, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jules Feiffer. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Regarding your edit [12], and edit summary "Come on... this is being discussed on the talk page... (TW)" – Here's the item, "About a year before the shooting, Scott's wife filed a restraining order against him saying that he carries a 9mm gun." I didn't see where this item was being discussed on the talk page, so I started a new section. --Bob K31416 (talk) 06:15, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Once again, there is some dispute over including certain incidents over at the List of terrorist incidents in July 2016 and List of terrorist incidents in September 2016 articles. I just got out of a block for edit-warring, I'm already at the edge of my rope here with all of this conclusion-jumping, and I'm not in the mood to get myself blocked again. Mind helping me out with my case if my reversions are undone yet again? I have alerted the other users involved to bring the issues to the talk pages, but I can tell someone's not going to listen. Parsley Man (talk) 01:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of awareness ribbons. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience dealing with all that train-crashing nonsense. I felt it worth mentioning that, as the man on the Clapham omnibus -- although actually I was on a Stagecoach Manchester bus at the time instead -- I found your comment "You cannot suggest someone intentionally derailed a train. That would be a criminal act" to be perfectly clear, and obviously referring to intentionally derailing a train as the criminal act. That unregistered editor seemed to make some really rather unreasonable assumptions. MPS1992 (talk) 18:25, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Onnit. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
I am an editor considering closing the RfC on the Shooting of Keith Lamont Scott on which you have offered some commentary. You misspelled "purpose"/ "propose". I only mention it because it degrades your argument (which is otherwise interesting). Please be careful about things like this!!! Thanks! KDS4444 (talk) 06:48, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:European Open (snooker). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Wurdi Youang. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Once again, there's problems regarding JBergsma1 posting certain content in the List of terrorist incidents in October 2016 article. The user believes a mere shootout with police is a terrorist attack, all because the shooter was a neo-Nazi. However, WP:RS doesn't even mention such an official classification as far as I'm concerned, and I've already pinged NewsAndEventsGuy and Doug Weller to participate. However, that doesn't seem to stop him, since he reverted my second reversion of that material. Parsley Man (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry been busy irl. Will try to look into it tomorrow. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:46, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
What are you talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.25.45.47 (talk) 09:32, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
The section of the Donald Trump article that was deleted has restored and slightly modified. See Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations
What specifically are your concerns about the article?
I've added a reference to a statement by the Trump campaign.
I believe the response from the Trump campaign should be included in order to ensure the article is neutral. I also believe that it is helpful to link this article to articles related to other presidential campaigns and political tactics so that readers understand the context in which the allegations of misconduct are being made.
I think it is preferable to improve articles rather than delete them. Please note the section was just added today. Typically articles (and sections) mature over a few days or weeks and therefore the first few additions may need additional referencing and polishing. I believe quick deletion should be avoided.
Your comments are appreciated!
WSDavitt (talk) 19:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Why have you removed mention of 5:16-cv-00797-DMG-KS ; Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein? I can understand the community's concerns around presenting the case in a balanced way, and think it will likely take multiple editors to produce something fair, unbiased, and 'encyclopedic'. But to delete any and all mention of it doesn't make sense. This is a real lawsuit - the case files have been unsealed by the District Courts for Media to report on. Many have done so, including The Atlantic, Guardian, etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wecarlisle (talk • contribs) 04:57, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Melanie and I'm here on behalf of my employer, Endurance International Group, to propose updates to the existing Wikipedia article. I am hoping to find a neutral editor to review the proposed draft mentioned in this edit request on the article's talk page. I won't edit the article directly because of my conflict of interest, but hope you might be able to help since you've made several edits to the article between 2013 and 2015. I am leaving talk page notes for the other editors I pinged before, too. Thanks for your consideration. Melanie from Endurance (talk) 14:57, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Pedals (bear) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Center for Security Policy. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Natalie Portman. Legobot (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
These are technically ban violations, as you point out. But others (User:Mar4d, User:Kautilya3) argue that Towns Hill makes useful contributions. He was allowed to appeal his ban after six months, and the six months have passed. What would you think of my lifting the ban, a thing which I am able to do as the banning admin? We'd be assuming that his editing will be an overall benefit in spite of the occasional problems. EdJohnston (talk) 18:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, EvergreenFir. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
On 18 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pedals (bear), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the New Jersey black bear Pedals walked on his hind legs due to injuries to his front paws? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pedals (bear). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Train Simulator (Dovetail Games). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
We have an editor who's persistently trying to categorize the article as an Islamic terrorist attack, despite the talk page discussion. I've already wasted my three reverts and am definitely not going to shoot for a fourth. I need some help here... Parsley Man (talk) 03:06, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I am Weiwen Leung, a student at the University of Minnesota. I am currently conducting a study on how people on the LGBT+ Wikipedians group use and contribute to Wikipedia.
Would you be willing to answer a short 5 minute survey? If so, please email me at leung085@umn.edu. It would be helpful if you could include your Wikipedia username when emailing.
Thank you, Weiwen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weiwensg (talk • contribs) 03:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox NFL biography. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Sorry but I fail to see how I "attacked" other members. Maybe they shouldn't insult me and label me as a racist. I think that is a crime and is racism itself. I'm failing to see how "White Pride" is a racist motto. The wikipedia page is wrong and needs changed. If it is your intention to silence me then I'll advocate on Facebook and other social media for help. This is why racism will never end. It is very clear to me that Wikipedia is very one sided and racist. Change is needed
ActorBoss (talk) 14:14, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
AccountForANI (talk) 14:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Artur Aleksanyan. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
at how quickly you came back with Category:Organizations that oppose same-sex marriage until I looked at your user page, then it sort of made sense. i started poking around that category and quite quickly discovered Sex Panic!, an article that states, 'It was founded to oppose both mainstream political measures to control sex, and elements within the gay community who advocated same-sex marriage and the restriction of public sexual culture as solutions to the HIV crisis." and I am wondering if that really puts it in the Category:Organizations that oppose same-sex marriage? it says, to me, that the organization opposes it for one reason (to combat AIDS), but it dos not state that the organization is opposed to same sex marriage. Or does it? I thought you might just know the answer off the top of your head. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 05:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jollof rice. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Re [13], that thing may never bot-archive if people continue to ignore the close and add out-of-process comments like this. I don't think removal of the comments is allowed under WP:TPO. Maybe you know how to manually archive it, I don't. ―Mandruss ☎ 06:47, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, as someone who has contributed to the thigh gap article, you might be interested in this discussion. – Smyth\talk 14:48, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Organizational behavior. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bing. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, following up on your edit, do I understand correctly that 'organizers' is not British spelling, but 'organized' and 'organizations' are British, per the edit before mine? Possible I suppose, but confusing to me! Thanks, Gap9551 (talk) 19:58, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Where can i find it? Arielluisfernandez (talk) 04:20, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Generation Snowflake. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I assume you removing my comments on Mlpearc's talk page was an innocent mistake, right? [14]. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:13, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Generation Snowflake. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
My goal is to make the text more inclusive. I think the perspective in the text is lacking. The text itself talks about stereotypes and the manner how the sexes are portrayed in the media(ads) and its effect. Sexism includes gender prejudice. I think my sources are very relevant,important and very similar of the sources already there. Open up about ur reasoning please. --Samwaisgamgii (talk) 17:52, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, did I do the same thing you did? My editing is as valiable as the one you re-add. So please, don't delete what I put for no reason. Be able to explain what's the difference between "Around the world" and "Societies whitout rape culture". And don't say it has nothing to do with rape culture, and if you do it, explain me why because I don't get how it is possible to be OK to put the article "Around the world" and not what I put.--Blanca Lap (talk) 17:50, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
And I'm tired of trying to understand WHAT "link" are talking about. Like, have you even read the links and sources I put? Blanca Lap (talk) 18:29, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
You have no reason no delete it!--Blanca Lap (talk) 08:43, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Come on! Peggy Reeves Sanday is not the only one. Have you read the sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blanca Lap (talk • contribs) 08:51, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
https://shareok.org/handle/11244/1308 Blanca Lap (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Can we stop now please? Blanca Lap (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I give you books and articles written not by Sanday but by other scientist in which they talk exactly about rape culture and you keep ignoring them Blanca Lap (talk) 09:51, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello EvergreenFir. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Death of Emilyn Villanueva to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:45, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I placed a question to be able to talk to someone about the Betsy and Me entry. It was removed, as I expected (although I had quite a giggle about the robot's insistance that my entry was wrong). It concerns this: I am very pleased to be quoted for my blog work on Betsy and Me and I believe it is rightly so. Nothing wrong with that. But whoever put together the article missed my article in Hogan's Alley #16 about Dwight Parks, who took over the strip from September 9 to the end of the year. In the article (based on an interview with his son David - with illustrations from his father provided by him) I reconstruct how Parks was chosen to be the successor of Jack Cole after his suicide and how the arrangement from the beginning had been that Parks would only fill out the contracts for that year. This is important because some people have written that Parks' version was a failure, while in fact he was picking up new papers as late as October. Since I am the writer of that article I probably can't make the adjustment myself, so how do I go about that? Also, later this year there will be a new article in Alter Ego about a different strip from that same period, where I reveal that a famous (like really famous) duo of creators tried out for the take-over as well and didn't get it, despite producing a full week of samples - copies of which are in my collection. Please contact me here or at geapelde at upcmail dot nl for further actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.111.229.62 (talk) 21:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
References
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Generation Snowflake. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Please excuse my erroneous edit, likely a mistaken rollback or revert caused by my fat fingers, hypnagogia, or one of my ridiculous cats. I have likely self reverted or noticed the mistake after you corrected it. Again, my apologies. Thank you. Testing EvergreenFir (talk) 07:51, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Why you deleted his legal name? --Lava03 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Great job on Pioneer Cabin Tree. Losing the DYK on a technicality sucks. But the article abides. On to the next project. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC) |
On 10 January 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Pioneer Cabin Tree, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:35, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:35, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
107,000 page views And 48,000 pages views here. Whoopee! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello EF. Thanks for reporting the legal threat stuff to ANI. You probably noticed the nearly ten year gap in that persons edits. Do you think they were in school getting their law degree? :-) Thanks again for your vigilance and have a delightful week. MarnetteD|Talk 16:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm contacting you as someone involved in the Wave of Terror in Europe merge discussion (which has incidentally been renamed if not merged). this article appears to me to have similair issues, borderline PoV fork, borderline OR, questionable commonname and same tendency to list every event as ISIS-related with little attempt at context. I wonder if you have time to take a look and give an opinion? Thanks. (please 'name' if replying here) Pincrete (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi EvergreenFir. I wondered if you've considered running for adminship? I'm looking for suitable candidates and an investigation through your stats and contribs leads me to believe you would be a good candidate! Given the quantity of vandals and socks you seem to deal with I doubt anyone could argue that you didn't have a need for the tools :) Let me know what your thoughts are; I'd recommend a listing at ORCP at least. Sam Walton (talk) 23:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
How are you feeling about the responses at ORCP? I've been doing some digging and reading and have started to make some notes for things that would be worth saying in a nomination statement, it's certainly the case that nothing there has put me off. I can't honestly say what your chances are because I suspect it will depend in large part how many users come out to vote who are still sore over the Eric Corbett affair or can't separate editing in contentious areas from being a contentious editor. I think a lot of the assumptions can be dealt with in a good nomination statement though, and I would want a solid co (or even primary)-nom alongside mine; I'm of course happy to discuss the nomination with you beforehand. At the end of the day, though, it's up to you if you want to run. There's no pressure to do so right now, and certainly no pressure to do so before letting your poll run longer, I just wanted to check-in on your thoughts. Sam Walton (talk) 01:17, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
...for your email. I was actually already thinking of doing what you suggested, but your email was very helpful, as it contained quite a few diffs, saving me some searching. I see that the problem has been going on since at least as far back as November 2015, and since then the article has been protected six times, for periods of either a week or a month. I have now protected it for two years. It seems obvious to me that if repeated short term protections have failed to stop a problem, and if that problem has been going on for far longer than any of the protections, then there is no point in just doing exactly the same again, but evidently not everyone agrees. Anyway, thanks again. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Persian people. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you reverted my edit on Wisconsin when I changed the /ɪ/s to /ᵻ/. Would you mind elaborating on why my change was wrong? For people who have the weak vowel merger (like me), those vowels do, in fact, end up being pronounced like [ə]. --Clorox (talk) 01:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, why did you revert page that i have corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanjkica (talk • contribs) 10:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Content that i have been deleted does not belong there since it is not considered as intersex condition. That is why I have deleted. And I didn't know where and how to leave reason. Cause this way of communication is soooooo confusing.
Tanjkica (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC) tanjkicaTanjkica (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
What will I ever do if you ban me? How will I ever live with myself when I can't make articles for free that don't benefit me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rzombie1988 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
No — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rzombie1988 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)