Just a quick question on the revisions I made to the Dennis Heaton entry: you have flagged it as "rollback Vandal". I'm curious as to why that is. All the links and updates I made were well-researched - in fact it took me several days to find and verify all the links. Is this just a general thing that's done when there are a lot of updates to a page? Also, the notice at the top of the page says that there are only IMDb links. In my updates I made sure NOT to use IMDb as a reference, and I believe with all the references I added it should no longer be a questionable entry. How does one get rid of the notice at the top of the page? Is that something you can do? I plan on adding more links in the filmography so they all have external references whenever possible, but it might take me a few more days... Anyway, I hope I've done a decent job with the updates. Please let me know what else might be needed for this page. I'd really appreciate it - thanks so much! [[User:Bczogalla|Bczogalla]] ([[User talk:Bczogalla|talk]]) 15:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Bczogalla
Just a quick question on the revisions I made to the Dennis Heaton entry: you have flagged it as "rollback Vandal". I'm curious as to why that is. All the links and updates I made were well-researched - in fact it took me several days to find and verify all the links. Is this just a general thing that's done when there are a lot of updates to a page? Also, the notice at the top of the page says that there are only IMDb links. In my updates I made sure NOT to use IMDb as a reference, and I believe with all the references I added it should no longer be a questionable entry. How does one get rid of the notice at the top of the page? Is that something you can do? I plan on adding more links in the filmography so they all have external references whenever possible, but it might take me a few more days... Anyway, I hope I've done a decent job with the updates. Please let me know what else might be needed for this page. I'd really appreciate it - thanks so much! [[User:Bczogalla|Bczogalla]] ([[User talk:Bczogalla|talk]]) 15:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Bczogalla
:{{U|Bczogalla}} I haven't edited [[Dennis Heaton]]. My bot has visited the page, but it didn't do a rollback. Perhaps you meant another page? [[User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite]] ([[User talk:Bgwhite#top|talk]]) 20:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Bczogalla}} I haven't edited [[Dennis Heaton]]. My bot has visited the page, but it didn't do a rollback. Perhaps you meant another page? [[User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite]] ([[User talk:Bgwhite#top|talk]]) 20:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey again, yeah, I think it was your bot who put the "Vandal" code on there. But when I clicked on the bot's talk page I got here. So that's why I was asking. Either way, who should I talk to about getting rid of the notices at the top of the Dennis Heaton page? Can you do that? If not, who should I ask? Thanks for your time![[User:Bczogalla|Bczogalla]] ([[User talk:Bczogalla|talk]]) 01:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Bczogalla
Revision as of 01:35, 28 July 2015
I believe most editors use Incorrect English, the second most common is American English, followed by Indian English and British English. -- Arnd Bergmann
Welcome to my talk page
I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag or a warning, please assume good faith.
If I have erred, don't hesitate to tell me, but being rude will get you nowhere.
I will not tolerate anyprofanity or extreme rudeness. If used in any way, it will be erased and your message not read.
Archives
Bot archives discussions after 30 days of inactivity into the latest archive
Import article Unexplained deletion of my External Links section
On the Import article, I expended great time and effort to develop this "start" grade article to include at least SOME useful, actionable information. The subject "Import" is of great importance to both the business and international political community. Yet this article is little more than a bit of academic chatter, with almost no truly useful information on this incredibly important subject, greatly affecting the entire world, on a day-to-day basis. In an attempt to enhance the article, providing USEABLE information for Wikipedia readers, in compliance with the External Links guidelines in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, I developed a very concise and substantial list of External Links -- mostly the basic official import guidance from the five governments representing the bulk of English-speaking Wikipedians engaged in international trade.
However, on 05:49, 13 June 2015, you deleted the entire effort without a single word of explanation, reverting to the prior stark and largely useless version.
Further, when I -- just now -- reverted your unexplained deletion to again include my edits, you INSTANTLY deleted, again, with NO explanation. Whether this is simple rudeness, or official Wikipedia policy that you were specfically authorized to engage in, I do not know, but an explanation would surely help me understand whether I made a mistake (and, if so, WHAT mistake, so I do not repeat it), and assist me in deciding whether my continued efforts at supplying useful information to Wikipedians is pointless. Please explain.
The article is on what "import" is, not links to government agencies or how to import into a country.
You listed four countries, with most links to the U.S. Wikipedia is a world site, not just for a few countries. More people speak English in India, Pakistan or Nigeria than any country you listed except for the U.S.
The guidelines actually is Wikipedia:External links. You are adding links that are only indirectly related to the main topic that can only grow to be hundreds of links.
Regardless of any intellectual purity of purpose of the original author of the article, the purpose of Wikipedia is to provide practical intelligence, not another academic tome. The nations noted should have been included, perhaps (though Pak. & Nig. do not have nearly the dollar volume of imports that the listed nations have, and India's volume is not that comparatively impressive, either). It would have been nice if you'd asked for their gov't's main sites on Importing to be included, rather than stripping all the others -- leaving an article devoid of any real value to almost anyone interested in the subject. You note that this would amount to "adding links that are only indirectly related to the main topic that can only grow to be hundreds of links." That's not realistic. This bland and useless stub article -- on a vastly important subject -- has been in place for a very long time, without anyone bothering to fix it. Consequently, it's unrealistic to think anyone's going to go to the trouble I went to for the English-speaking five leading-importing nations, to expand it to include all the others.
You note further that... "FYI... you added the links in the wrong spot" -- without giving any clue as to where they would have belonged. I followed the above-noted Wikipedia style guide. What more was required?
Trying, conscientiously and constructively, with great effort at fairness, relevance and neutrality, to provide relevant information, seems not to be a good use of my time, anymore. Too many nit-picking Wiki editors too concerned with administrative trivia and rigid (within their own perspective) rules (largely baed on their own subjective interpretations), and not as concerned with ensuring Wikipedia articles contain substantial, useful, relevant information for the real world. Senseless and pointless.
...but was this edit intentional, or soemthing wrong with AWB? Just asking, since you just removed all sources. Badly formatted and not some not reliable, but the last two might have been, I don't know. Just curious. (t) Josve05a (c)10:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Josve05a Are you still alive? I haven't been bugged seen you in awhile. Goodreads is not a reliable ref and neither is "some native people living in Ardebil". What cooking book is "rosa montazami's cooking book" referencing... she wrote many. The last two were just wikilinks and nothing else. There needs to be more than that.
I don't know if you have Netflix. If you do, you should watch Sense8. Let's just say there was a couple that my wife was drooling over. I asked her if they were better than Captain Jack and all she said was mmmmmmmmmmm. Bgwhite (talk) 19:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have Netflix, but have been looking in to watching Sence8 for quite a few weeks now, but my list of series I follow is quite long currently. Will look into this show tomorrow, especially if the characters pass your wife's mmmmmmm-test. (t) Josve05a (c)20:19, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Josve05a Interesting web site. I'd hate to see how much I watch. Looking at your favourites, it appears we like alot of the same things. I haven't seen Suits, Bad Judge or Magic Mike. True Blood got too far out there, so we quit watching it after season 4. Mr Bean is in my top 10 all time favourite TV shows. Also on Netflix, Orange is the New Black and Daredevil are both very, very good.
Mandarax Boy, Sense8 is nothing like what Straczynski has done in the past. The show is more like the Wachowski's Cloud Atlas. It has Lana Wachowski's fingerprints all over it. I really enjoyed it, but it is not for everyone. The best part is they film in 8 different countries with all native cast except for the Nigerian bus driver. You see things one doesn't see on American TV. I tell people about the show and they say... uggh, I'm not going to watch a show about a gay couple or real-life transgender actress in a lesbian relationship or stories about Nigerians, Indians or Koreans. But, the show is all about family and what you will do for your family or because of your family. Bgwhite (talk) 05:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had never heard about Cloud Atlas, but looking at its article, I don't think I'd like it. I don't have a problem watching shows about any of those topics you mentioned. About the gay couple ... was that the couple your wife was drooling over? As for Straczynski, maybe he's one of those people who just has one story to tell, albeit an epic story told magnificently. And the analogy I'm thinking of here is Richard Kelly, who gave us Donny Darko, and then followed up with the abomination that is Southland Tales. Suits is pretty good. Bad Judge starred the actress who portrayed Sam Hess's widow in Fargo. BTW, after watching the series, I saw the movie again, after almost twenty years. About all I had remembered was the wood chipper. (Did you know that the wood chipper made a very brief cameo appearance in the series?) One especially relevant thing I had completely forgotten about the movie was the money being buried, marked with the ice scraper. I must say that the series was much, much, much better than the movie. MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM08:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Swisher sweets cigar article
Good morning/ afternoon BGWhite (depending on your location)
I edited a page that was for Swisher Sweets towards the beginning of June , the 12th I believe, I added my knowledge from the products to the page and I noticed it was reverted to the original article. I was just curious as to why? I reached this page by accessing Swisher International Group page and clicking on the product offering section. I assumed that my knowledge would be helpful for some. If I was wrong I do apologize. All I wanted was for a complete as possible page on Swisher's products that they have/ had made. Do I nee to create a separate page?
MyzcarAlpha You gave a big, long list of products available from the company. Wikipedia is not a product catalog. One can mention various products, such as a top seller, popular ones, etc. But, context needs to be given along with some info about the product. Bgwhite (talk) 05:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I was wondering if there was a reason why your bot moved my PROD endorsement to the top of the page when it was fixing an unrelated issue. Was this an intended part of its operation? Thanks! Ж(Cncmaster) T/C/AVA/RfA-C04:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bgwhite: I've looked at the linked edit. Beforehand, there were two templates {{Proposed deletion/dated}} and {{Proposed deletion endorsed}} in that order; and the bot exchanged them. The {{Proposed deletion endorsed}} template contains the instruction "If you remove the {{proposed deletion}} tag above, please also remove this {{Proposed deletion endorsed}} tag." which implies that {{Proposed deletion endorsed}} should be the second one of the pair, although this is not stated in its documentation. The bot exchanged them, which (to me) is an error. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:07, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Glrx Haven't a clue what CRC is except for a computer network error check. However, the bot will keep visiting the page because all you do is revert. The reason the bot arrives isn't fixed, so the bot will continue visiting the page. Instead of doing a blind revert, just fix the one character. Bgwhite (talk) 05:40, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Chemical Rubber Co. handbook is a reference used in the article. Your bot is taking a correct hyphenated page |page=15-52 and changing it to an incorrect page range |pages=15–52. Glrx (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What Glrx is saying is that 15-52 doesn't refer to a range of pages, but a single page - it's some 25 years since I last picked up a Rubber Handbook, but IIRC this is the 52nd page in section 15. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:12, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fixing the Oxy-fuel welding and cutting page does not stop the bot from doing similar damage to other articles. The bot needs to stop assuming that page=a-b is a page range. I'm happy with "fixing" pages=a-b by replaceing the hyphen with an endash, but not if the param is just page. As far as understanding what you are saying, I don't think ordinary editors should be inserting nonbreaking hyphens U+2011. The bot creating a page range is the worse error. Glrx (talk) 17:16, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Glrx I suggest you follow the instructions at {{cite book}}. Per here, the |page= is only for page numbers. Sections do not belong there. You need to use the |at= parameter. The bot is behaving per the instructions. I'd also suggest not using CRC. 99.9% of the readers will not understand you are referring to a page number range. Maybe say |at=sec. 15 p. 52? Bgwhite (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your here pinpoint does not support your position. It says that hyphens are automatically converted for |pages=, but it does not say hyphens are automatically converted for |page=. The page number in the source is "15-52"; it is not "sec. 15 p. 52". Glrx (talk) 17:53, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Glrx You left off 1/2 of the sentence.... "Hyphens are automatically converted to en dashes; if hyphens are appropriate, for example: pp. 3-1–3-15, use |at=.}} (emphasis mine)
Also, "at: For sources where a page number is inappropriate or insufficient. "
|pages= is ONLY for page number. Again, 99.9% of the readers will not have a clue you are referring to a section anyway. Bgwhite (talk) 18:07, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: That's exactly the wrong thing to do from a software engineering standpoint. That temporarily fixes the problem in one place while the problem persists everywhere else. Question: did the bot do the wrong thing with page=? I say yes. What do you think? If the bot is fixed, then it will do the right thing with the other problems on the page. Glrx (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) @Bgwhite: No, the other half is irrelevant. The scope of the paragraph is pages=. (As an aside, I would argue that a bot that sees page hypen page endash page hypen page should not convert the two hyphens to endashes. There is nothing ambiguous when an editor uses an embedded endash.) Glrx (talk) 19:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm out. I'm not going to waste any more time on a silly hyphen when 99.9% of the people will see it as a range of pages. Plus your refusal to use |at=, which is what the docs say to use and which will solve the problem. Sorry, if it comes to conforming to an "obscure" standard that practically nobody understands or something with which 99.9% of the readers will understand, I'd go with what the readers will understand. Bgwhite (talk) 19:30, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bgwhite. I hope you are doing well and thank you for your recent edits to the Srithika article. Has the Persondata template been deprecated? It was unclear to me why this had been removed from the article. Regards, Yamaguchi先生18:11, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Geopersona I didn't. Per the edit summary, "Revert edits by IP.", I reverted the edits made by the IP just before you. The IP changed "period" to "era". The article currently has "period". Bgwhite (talk) 04:49, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Bgwhite, though it does say 'era' still (in fact its says both period and era within that short para) - your revert seems inadvertently to have caught my single edit (after the IP) too - no big deal, mind - in the particular stylistic context, one could get away with era. I only mentioned it as I spend time now and again correcting eras to periods (and sometimes vice versa) on various articles edited by non-geologists. cheers Geopersona (talk) 08:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Bgwhite, Why do you think, that "Complete list of Large Hawk Cuckoo's nest-host" doesn't belong here? Best regards, Hunu (talk) 07:00, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hunu 1) It is breaking the page. 2) A huge long list doesn't belong there. 3) There is only ONE species of Large Hawk Cuckoo, you are giving a list that contains other species of Hawks to song birds that has nothing to do with what is in the article. 4) Most is unreferenced. Bgwhite (talk) 19:28, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Bgwhite! 1) Yes, this stub is too short. But you made it much shorter. I believe that it should be good long article in future. 2) All these birds are nest-host of this species Large hawk-cuckoo so It does belong here. 3) Yes, this one species, Large hawk-cuckoo, is using nests of all these birds to raise its chicks. I don't understand where did you find "other species of Hawks to song birds". What do you mean? 4) The list has the reference. Yes, of course, it's accumulates results of dozens ornithologists, but it's not necessary put all different references for each bird in Wikipedia, because Alexander Namerov did it before us. Hunu (talk) 06:38, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hunu you are breaking the page. Stop. All the birds needs references, not just a couple. The list has nothing to do with what is in the article. There is nothing in the article that relates to song birds. A random list does not improve a stub. It tells me nothing about the hawk. Bgwhite (talk) 06:44, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm responding to the note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds#Large_hawk-cuckoo. The list is poorly formatted ({{collapsible list}} might be better) and should not remain in its current state, but as cuckoos are brood parasites, the list may in fact be encyclopedic and worthy of inclusion if it shows a global perspective (e.g. all hosts across the range, rather than just some hosts from a limited area during one study), and a collapsible list is an ideal way to efficiently and attractively store such information (there for the readers who are interested, hidden for people who don't care). If the list is included, there should be introductory text to provide context: brood parasitism in Large hawk-cuckoos should be adequately described prior to the list. It appears that most of the list is in fact cited to the book in the title. --Animalparty-- (talk) 08:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear --Animalparty--, thank you for your response. Yes, I'm agree that It would be better if the collapsible list has three columns. But I'm freshman in the enWiki, I don't now how it's posiiable to make it here. Hunu (talk) 09:42, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I work with Toul-e-Islam, it is not a Quranist organization, it considers Quranist groups as sects, and it is categorically against sectarianism. TouleIslam is non-denominational, I'm trying to add it on the non-denominational wiki page. Please contact me for further information before reverting edits on Quranist page, thanks Code16 (talk) 15:09, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Code16 I don't have a clue on who is right in this dispute. All I know is the IP is removing sourced material and adding unsourced material. If the edit war continues, I'll have to put page protection on the article. I highly suggest you state your case on the talk page and hash this out. Bgwhite (talk) 19:35, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bgwhite I can put you in touch with the director of Toul-e-Islam Trust and you can verify that Toul-e-Islam is NOT a "Quranist" organization. I have asked the other person to contact me directly via my talk page if he wants this confirmation/verifcation as well, but he has not done so. He does not have an account so I can't post on his talk page either. Also, there is no general talk page for the "Quranist" wiki, so I'm not sure which talk page you are referring me to, let me know and I'll state my case there. Code16 (talk) 19:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Code16 The talk page would be the article's talk page... Talk:Quranism. You can state your case there. Talking to the director won't help as there needs to be references that people can look up. Refs also have to be neutral.
This might be the case where some people consider Toul-e-Islam to be a Quranist organization, while others do not. If that is the case, then both points of view should be stated. Bgwhite (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An article that I have been contributing to is now being reviewed for GA status and the reviewer says that I need to fix the dashes using a script. I don't know how to do this or even what it means. I know you have copyedited a few of my articles in the past and so I thought you might know how to do this. The article is Pelvic inflammatory disease. If you can't help, let me know who else to ask. Best Regards,
(talk page stalker)@Bfpage: On your watchlist, you may occasionally encounter edits by other people with an edit summary like "fixed dashes using a script" - that is what your reviewer is referring to. You don't need to use User:GregU/dashes.js to fix dashes, the main thing is to get all the hyphens and dashes in accordance with MOS:DASH by any legal means; for example, CabbagePotato (talk·contribs) appears to have made these fixes entirely manually.
I've had a look at Pelvic inflammatory disease as it now stands and all the dashes are fine, but there are a few places where the hyphen-minus character (that's the one on the top row of your keyboard) has been used where an en-dash might be more appropriate. For example, in the titles of three references ("Global incidence and prevalence of selected curable sexually transmitted infections - 2008"; "Self-Study STD Modules for Clinicians - Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID) Next Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Your Online Source for Credible Health Information CDC Home Footer Separator Rectangle Epidemiology"; and "Prevention - STD Information from CDC") there are spaced hyphens, but a spaced en-dash would be better. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:29, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bgwhite!
I noticed that you are fixing typos with AWB. I have made a preparsed list of about 20.000 articles that contain (possible) typos that can be fixed with AWB. I'm assuming that that is a bit too much for one person, but if you want to you can do some of them. Please remove the ones you want to do from the list, so that other people don't have to look at them again. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 04:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PAGENAME
Hi there. Could you please explain what's wrong with {{PAGENAME}} being in an article? Here, specifically, I want the page title to be reflected inside the template, whichever title the article may have over time. WP:GENFIXES talks specifically about replacing the {{PAGENAME}} template with the magic word {{PAGENAME}}, but says nothing about removing the magic word from articles. —capmo (talk) 15:30, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
capmo The edit summary states, "WP:CHECKWIKI error fix #34. Template programming element." These should generally be avoid in articles as they introduce unnecessary and confusing code. There are currently no articles with PAGENAME. The article's name is in the article multiple times. Not having PAGENAME in one external link is not going any greater confusion down the road. Bgwhite (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hafspajen Boy, I was joking on the FP because this is something waaaaay different from your normal beautiful pictures. My only FP will be for fart battles. I will boast of this proud achievement far and wide. Bgwhite (talk) 17:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from July 21. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from July 22. It will be on all Wikipedias from July 23 (calendar).
You now see more warnings in the image viewer. They tell you to be careful when using the image, for example if it shows a person. [1]
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on July 21 at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
Soon you won't be able to use MathJax to display math. [2]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Halpin until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Reference errors on 22 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
What is there not to understand? It's source code. Source code is wrapped around tags. Cedar101 removed the tags from the article and I restored them. They are also editing Oz (programming language) and Ur (programming language) which also contain the tags. You don't have to set a language, just make sure the tags are there. One can set the lang to a very similar language. Bgwhite (talk) 04:26, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why must we use the syntaxhighlight or source tags? Where is the policy that supports your reverts? Please actually look at the edit history before replying. John Vandenberg(chat)06:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
John Vandenberg You know darn well why it is used. I have no idea why you are making a mountain out of a molehill and treating me like shit. As I've previously said, use whatever tag you like. Use whatever language you like, even if it is no language. Bgwhite (talk) 07:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please review the status of this article, and revert yourself unless there is a policy which says the source tag must be used, even inappropriately as you have done. John Vandenberg(chat)08:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
John Vandenberg Before you started this escapade, you know why I did the edit, you know why the tag is there and you know how to tweak it. It seems your only goal is to waste time and give me shit. This is now the third time you've done this, atleast you're not threatening with blocks like the first time or calling me an outrageous ass like the second. Go away. Bgwhite (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Plase correct your excessive/inadequate mono-template use
Hello, could you check a fail in your edits? If it was a Bot, is important to correct the bug.
(talk page stalker) I think the article is still partially broken, specifically the text beneath the images at DE-9IM#Illustration, e.g. the text beneath the top-left image says "dim[{{{1}}}] = 2" instead of "dim[I(a)∩I(b)] = 2". There's also a "{{{1}}}" in the DE-9IM#Standards. (I don't have time to investigate/fix it myself right now). DH85868993 (talk) 21:48, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
AQh? I am not worried. You will just find an other featured pic to nominate, probably, like thas. Drmies could translate it ... and we nominate it. He will have the DYK. Hafspajen (talk) 22:44, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You've reverted my edits 2x. Any particular reason? neffk (talk)
Neffk, take a look at your version. You completely destroyed the formatting of the article. You essentially vandalized the article. You need to hit preview before saving your changes. Also, it looks like you edited this elsewhere and then saved it on Wikipedia. Please don't. Bgwhite (talk) 20:59, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see some formatting issues. If I fix the formatting issues will you stop reverting? neffk (talk)
I hope you are back to 100% now. I also hope you saw the nice message that I sent you, wishing you a speedy recovery, with a painting that I drew just for you. The painting messed up your page format terribly, but my intentions were good.
Enough with the insincere formalities! LOL Look, Bgwhite, you know the nightmare that several of us went through with the Harp Twins article. I made many mistakes, partly because I was young and stupid, and to some degree because I did feel as if others provoked me, even though I don't claim to be less responsible than them for that disastrous situation. As you know very well, I'm in the Wikipedia Sons of B*tches Hall of Shame. Anyway, although I did agree to not edit the article (and I complied for a very long time), I'm not a fan of those girls any more, as I told you a few months ago. So at that point I helped Wayzgoose learn how to update the article because I had lost interest (you can see that he has made several edits).
However, I simply could not let the creator of the article (Crowdsalesmed) get away with a recent edit. Oh, by the way, I see a brand new edit from that user now. Crowdsalesmed removed the remarks made by Megan Bledsoe in a thesis for a Doctor's degree in Harp Performance. The reason? The observations are not very flattering. But even when I was a fanatical fan of those girls, I actually was very impressed and pleased when Lesser Cartographies found that reference and added it to the article. The fact that the Harp Twins were mentioned in an academic paper shows more notability, in my opinion, and I thought it was a great contribution to the article. Besides, you don't need me to tell you that an article should show different perspectives about the subject, not just the flattering ones. That's the whole point of the NPOV policy, right? Neutrality. Or else we have a promotional article instead of an encyclopedic article. So I reinserted those observations. Megan Bledsoe is an authority on the subject. Notice in the edit description how Crowdsalesmed mischaracterized Megan Bledsoe to get rid of her. After I reinserted the information, Crowdsalesmed removed it again, this time claiming that I had no right to edit the article because you had blocked me. You can see what I wrote in the edit description when I added the reference a second time. But now that contributor has distorted the reference (introduced by Lesser, as I said), to minimize Bledsoe. Instead of "Music theorist and harpist Megan Bledsoe" it reads "Harp player Megan Bledsoe", and instead of "remarks", it now says "remarked in a personal thesis paper". I think that's massive POV going on. "Personal"? That was for the University of Washington!
I will let you decide what to do with that, although I know you have much catching up to do with your administrative tasks. But really, I couldn't just watch that happen. It would be immoral to do so. Although I had huge disagreements with Lesser and Duff at the time, I do believe that they were essentially trying to keep the article neutral. Perhaps at some point their feelings towards me got in the way a bit, but they both had valid points for sure. I still think Duff should not have come back to the article after voting to delete it, but he didn't break any rules in that sense. If I had not reinserted the Bledsoe remarks, it might seem as if I merely pretended that I was no longer a Harp Twins fan, to then let the article get out of control little by little, more and more promotional, having sort of gotten Lesser and Duff out of the way. That would have made me look despicable. So yes, I edited the article without your permission, but it was to reestablish neutrality by merely reinserting what Lesser had put in there. I did it twice, but Crowdsalesmed can't handle that observation that Bledsoe wrote. I don't want to fight on that article any more. As I said, I have lost interest and I'm tired of fighting there. I hope you understand. Could you please add that article to your watchlist again so you can keep it balanced? And please check that last edit, which I already explained to you (Bledsoe is being mischaracterized in the article now, which is worse than doing that in the edit description, of course). I just don't think that's right.
Update: Crowdsalesmed obviously read my message to you because that user quickly made some corrections to what I had pointed out here as blatant POV, presumably fearing that you might address the issue. I'm being stalked! Oh no! I'm scared! What is exposed is a serious COI. Such mortification over what a harp authority wrote about them... unbelievable. They know that potential clients won't like that. But Wikipedia is not for landing gigs. Notice that Crowdsalesmed took out part of the remarks that Megan Bledsoe made: [3]. I made another edit tonight to clarify the sentence but I did not reinsert what was chopped off. When you have a chance please take a look. Thanks in advance. Dontreader (talk) 07:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bgwhite, I hope to only write here one time because I don’t want to clutter your page and infringe on your time. But I thought I should inform you of what Dontreader wrote on my talk wall. Dontreader’s post accuses me of working for the Harp Twins (I don’t), having ill-intentions, being morally bankrupt, and ends with a threat against the Camille and Kennerly Kitt wiki page. I’m not a very experienced user, and I try to show good faith, but I don’t feel comfortable responding to this user directly due to the escalatory nature of his/her interactions. I’d prefer that the ban stay in place for the safety of the Harp Twins page and those who occasionally work on it. Thanks, Camilla, with an "a" ;)
Here is what Dontreader posted on my talk page (sorry I don’t know how to just link it):
“Give those twins this message since you obviously work for them:
It's one thing to be totally ungrateful despite the countless hours I have dedicated to your article, even getting the pictures up there for you. But to say that I can't edit because I have been banned? That's moral bankruptcy, even by your own standards. Or have you forgotten that I agreed to a ban after the nightmare I went through to defend your page? I've been on good terms with Duffbeerforme for a long time now. I had misunderstood him. I haven't seen Lesser Cartographies in ages, but I suppose he's still around. You had better stop what you are doing, pushing a POV to use Wikipedia for promotional purposes. You can say whatever you want on your website to try to impress clients and hopefully land fantastic gigs like comic cons, but we have rules here on Wikipedia. Regarding the ban, it was never meant to last for all eternity. Things have changed. If I tell Duff and Lesser that I will not interfere with whatever they wish to do on your article, Bgwhite would have no choice but to lift the ban completely. Is that what you want? You want them to freely edit your article? I can give them a green light in an instant. What you wrote about me being banned was way too foul considering how it happened. You had better stop that sort of behavior immediately or else you can try to imagine what will happen to your precious article.” Dontreader (talk) 07:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite, any intelligent person can see that Crowdsalesmed obviously works for the Harp Twins and therefore has a COI. That person's recent behavior on the article shows utter desperation, not typical edit warring. Such an obsession with removing unflattering content, especially taking into consideration that the content in question conflicts with the main slogans that the Harp Twins use (such as "Harp Twins Rock Harps", which is on the T-shirts they sell), plus the fact that they just released a new metal cover video which is attracting metalheads to this page, leaves no room for doubt regarding a COI. But what upset me more than any other vile behavior I have ever seen on Wikipedia (and I have seen incredibly outrageous things here) was the usage by Crowdsalesmed of the ban pretext to again remove legitimate (but inconvenient) content from the article. I went through hell to defend the article from what I perceived at the time (basically due to my lack of experience and total fanaticism) was an attack on the article by Duff and Lesser. I succeeded at getting them out of the way, but I was forced to accept a painful ban. And Crowdsalesmed knows that story perfectly, let me assure you, so to bring up the ban issue in this recent context is beyond appalling and deplorable. How can I not react to such a thing? Crowdsalesmed brought that "threat" upon himself/herself. The reality is that there is no reason for the ban any more. You came up with that solution because there was a toxic problem between Duff and myself, but that is no longer the case. I have apologized to Duff (long ago). I should apologize to Lesser too. But anyway, since I don't have a problem with them, and I don't mind at all if they edit the article, it makes no sense to keep the ban in place. That article is in no need of a special solution any longer. Anyone can edit it, I believe, just like any other article. If problems arise, they should be discussed on the talk page to reach consensus. I addressed Crowdsalesmed's inexcusable removal of content (which remains partly removed, as I said) or else I would look like someone with no moral integrity. It's the least I could do after what I did to Duff and Lesser. Now the record shows that despite the absence of Duff and Lesser, I made an effort to enforce NPOV, which is what they were always complaining about. For months I had really done nothing on the article, and I have no intention of doing anything else unless there's clear vandalism. Crowdsalesmed created this isolated incident, but as is typical with Crowdsalesmed, this user will never admit to having made a mistake. Dontreader (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Crowdsalesmed simply wants me out of the picture. He/she thinks that by reporting to you what might be an isolated personal attack on that user's talk page could get me banned. Unfortunately for this user, here is an official Wikipedia policy. I could argue that what this user wrote in that edit description is a personal attack, but no, it was MUCH worse than a personal attack. Even the people of Sodom and Gomorrah would have frowned upon that sort of behavior! I know that because I was a Sodomite in a previous incarnation. Anyway, Crowdsalesmed has yet to explain the removal of that content, and therefore it should be fully reinserted. Oh, and since I'm an adult, here is how I dealt with someone who called me a vandal, which is a personal attack. Dontreader (talk) 00:33, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like it was made with AutoWikiBrowser, which is something I haven't used, and I see from its page that it does tedious formatting edits. But there were just so many edits at this line that I couldn't interpret it, and it looked like it had changed or removed some citations, which I know can't be what really happened. I'm sorry to ask a dumb question, and I know I should be able to figure it out, but I thought maybe it might actually be a simple question for someone who actually understood it already, so: Can you help me understand what this change meant? valereee (talk) 11:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Arnd. Reaching out to you regarding your change to Colin Callender's page. You added that:"At ITV, Callender worked on several television epics, such as Brideshead Revisited and Jewel in the Crown." While he was at Granada when these programs were made, he didn't explicitly work on them so it would be unfair to say this. As a result I have deleted the comment. I hope that is ok with you.
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
You can now use redirects to link to JavaScript pages. [4]
There was a problem with some Lua modules on July 22 and 23. Some pages using them did not list them in "what links here". You can fix those pages with a null edit: edit and save the page without making any change.
There was a problem with the abuse filter page on big wikis on July 23. It was due to a code error. [9]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from July 28. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from July 29. It will be on all Wikipedias from July 30 (calendar).
JavaScript authors: You cannot use wgNoticeUserData to get edit counts anymore. [10]
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on July 28 at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Hi there,
Just a quick question on the revisions I made to the Dennis Heaton entry: you have flagged it as "rollback Vandal". I'm curious as to why that is. All the links and updates I made were well-researched - in fact it took me several days to find and verify all the links. Is this just a general thing that's done when there are a lot of updates to a page? Also, the notice at the top of the page says that there are only IMDb links. In my updates I made sure NOT to use IMDb as a reference, and I believe with all the references I added it should no longer be a questionable entry. How does one get rid of the notice at the top of the page? Is that something you can do? I plan on adding more links in the filmography so they all have external references whenever possible, but it might take me a few more days... Anyway, I hope I've done a decent job with the updates. Please let me know what else might be needed for this page. I'd really appreciate it - thanks so much! Bczogalla (talk) 15:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Bczogalla[reply]
Hey again, yeah, I think it was your bot who put the "Vandal" code on there. But when I clicked on the bot's talk page I got here. So that's why I was asking. Either way, who should I talk to about getting rid of the notices at the top of the Dennis Heaton page? Can you do that? If not, who should I ask? Thanks for your time!Bczogalla (talk) 01:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Bczogalla[reply]
