User talk:JzG/Archive 123

Archive 120

Archive 121

Archive 122

Archive 123

Archive 124

Archive 125

→

Archive 130

Edit Quest!

	Edit Quest!
	Titusfox has requested that you join them for an afternoon of questing, slaying and looting at Edit Quest, the Wikipedia Based RPG! I Hope to see you there! TF { Contribs } { Edit Quest! } 19:11, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Funny edit conflict

Hi Guy. Funny I was not warned of an edit conflict when I added to a section you already hatted at ANI. Sorry about that. I think I will leave it in place though, as it provides additional info the user is likely not aware of. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks, Guy (Help!) 19:49, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

User:MBUSHIstory

Hello, Guy. Is User:MBUSHIstory's current user page kosher? It reads to me like a personal attack on two editors, so I'm wondering if it should be blanked. (User talk:MBUSHIstory contains the same message, but I'm guessing that is not as much of an issue?...) Anyway, I'm just looking for an "official" opinion on this. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, good point. I have dealt with it. Guy (Help!) 08:48, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Dominic Frisby

Dominic Frisby is the co-host of Money Pit, and I've just spotted that he co-authored bits of Mark Curry-era Catchphrase from the credits (I got up early to watch a repeat of a Fifteen to One grand final and stayed on to watch it after recognizing my old school nurse as one of the contestants). Could you unprotect that article?--Launchballer 06:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Try Draft:Dominic Frisby. Guy (Help!) 08:48, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

What a mess that was! I can't say I'm a fan of AfC - my article on Monyaka was ossifying there for many months while I was operating anonymously - but I've reworked the book reviews into continuous prose and added reciprocal links to all articles linked at Special:WhatLinksHere/Dominic Frisby. I'll do a proper search for him in Wikipedia later but how's it looking now?--Launchballer 10:06, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Duggar

I have reverted your revert at the Josh Duggar article for the following reasons: You stated in your edit summary, "Actually, no, there is a difference in character between those who sell cars and those who only sell used cars". I can't even imagine why you, an administrator and editor of over a decade, would think that's a valid reason to add content. We don't add content to BLPs in order to imply an article subject has a particular kind of "character" based on what their profession and/or business is. We don't make judgements about the character of article subjects - especially living article subjects - nor do we try to lead readers to reach such conclusions based on article content. Such a mindset is POV. Certainly, you can see that, right? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:51, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Winkelvi, I am not only an administrator: I am also someone who has, during more than half a century of existence on this planet, visited car dealerships. In the US and in Europe. In both the US and Europe, there are two kinds of car salespeople: those who work in the big dealerships that sell both new and used cars, and those who work in the second tier where only used cars are sold. That is why the term "used-car salesman" exists as a separate entity. Guy (Help!) 00:56, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, who hasn't visited a car dealership? I know a few people who have sold used cars. They were people of exemplary character. I've know a few people who sold new cars. They were not of exemplary character. Regardless, who they are character-wise has zero relevance to their profession in regard to this, or any Wikipedia article. Sorry, but your reasoning is WP:OR POV and with that POV you are attempting to add unnecessary content to the article in order to imply the subject of a BLP is of low character. There are just so many things wrong with that entire scenario I can't believe you are even suggesting it to be legitimate. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:59, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

So what? The fact remains that "used-car salesman" is a specific term of art that is widely understood. See Automobile salesperson: "Salesmen are employed by new car dealerships or used car dealerships". Two separate categories of dealership, understood as such by, as far as I can make out, the world and his dog. Guy (Help!) 01:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

"Widely understood" is POV, not encyclopedic, and has no business being added to a BLP for the reasons you stated. And you know it. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:50, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Josh Duggar. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please stop. Discuss on article talk page per BRD. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:03, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

This comes across as sour grapes about the topic ban. The sources say "used car lot" and "used car salesman". Take it out altogether or include it in full, I don't give a shit. Guy (Help!) 01:06, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh, FFS. This doesn't have a goddamned thing to do with the (now non-existent and reversed) topic ban. It has to do with you edit warring over something you recklessly and carelessly wanted included because - as you, yourself stated - you wanted a POV impression given to readers about the subject of a BLP. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

You say. In other news, the sources back "used car salesman" as presently in the article and sourced to the Washington Post. Ironic that you reject the Mail (which is ideologically supportive of Duggar-style views) so we end up with WaPo, which ain't so much. So it goes. In case you hadn't noticed, I live in a country where the Duggar clan are essentially unknown. I have no dog in this fight at all. Guy (Help!) 01:20, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I do say. Why would I give a shit about your one comment at an appeal where the reason for the appeal was rescinded? I don't and you really need to give that idea a rest. As far as the DM goes, I haven't rejected it as a RS, Wikipedia rejects is as a RS (last time I knew). The Washington Post is now, and always has been, a RS. Where you live means nothing to me, ergo, no reason to bring it up in relation to this. What does matter to me is that you are still defending your OR POV that basically should be filed into oblivion with the notion that "all Brits are snobs". Such personal feelings and beliefs have no place in editing BLPs. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:30, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Yada, yada, yada. Sources say "used car salesman" and describe his business as a "used car lot". Why would we say anything different? Don't bother answering, I actually don't care. Guy (Help!) 01:33, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Your reasons for adding it were inappropriate and against policy. You know it but continue to defend it and come up with new reasons why you were justified. And if you truly didn't care, you wouldn't keep responding and continuing to defend your undefendable position and edit summary. Now, you may remove this, as well. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:53, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Good seeing you around

Hey... you're not dead! I thought you threw in the towel years ago. :) -- Kendrick7^talk 11:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Ha! I am old, but not so old that I give up easily :-) I do less than I used to because over the last five or six years I have been given more and more work and responsibility. Which is fun, but saps the energy I used to have for playing whack-a-mole with vandals. Guy (Help!) 19:11, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Similar story here. I used to have all the time in the world to futz about with the wiki at work while the computer was doing its thing in the background. Now the computer is ~70x faster. -- Kendrick7^talk 06:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Clarification request archived

Hello. This is a message to inform you that a clarification request that you were involved in, pertaining to the Privatemusings arbitration case (t) (ev / t) (w / t) (pd / t), has been archived with no action. You can now find it here. For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 01:21, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Natalac

How can I activate a wikipedia Draft page? https://trademarks.justia.com/863/72/natalac-86372570.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yameka (talk • contribs) 22:53, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Go away, spammer. Guy (Help!) 01:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)