Jump to content

User talk:Falcon8765

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Meaghan (talk | contribs) at 15:13, 22 December 2010 (→Happy Holidays!: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. I'm not infallible, if I've made a mistake in reverting one of your edits, don't hesitate to point it out to me. If you're here to insult me or otherwise vandalize this page, it'll just be reverted with my feelings left very much intact.

It may take me a while to respond to messages, I'm not as active as I once was.

Good Doctor Fry edits on Sunrise/Sunset

First, before I say anything else: Thank you thank you thank you for helping put a stop to the edit war on the Sunset article. However, you should reconsider the revert of Fry's most recent edit. It appears that User:The Good Doctor Fry has changed his tune. He is no longer removing referenced material, and he has acknowledged that main point that depletion of blue/green light by scattering is responsible for the red sunset. He even gave something of an apology. It is debatable whether his edit improved the section or just made it a lot longer, but I don't feel it warrants a revert. Spiel496 (talk) 20:04, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be on the safe side, I undid your revert in the meantime. This editor seemed pretty upset before. If it turns out he really has come away from the dark side, I'd hate for his first experience to be an unjustified revert. Spiel496 (talk) 21:48, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. If you are willing to give him the benefit of a doubt, then so am I. EDIT: I hadn't seen his apology. Falcon8765 (TALK) 22:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Rodger Kamenetz page

Hi,I added a link on Rodger's book "Stuck" b/c other of his books are linked directly to Amazon. If I can't link to Amazon, then I'm not understanding why the other links were allowed. We are the publisher of two of his books, and since one of our titles was already linked, I thought it would be OK to link the other.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.167.7 (talk) 17:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just can't link to pages that sell the product. Falcon8765 (TALK) 17:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should remove the other Amazon links so that people like myself don't get confused as to what is appropriate and what isn't. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.167.7 (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't see the other Amazon links. No worries though, I see how you could be confused. However, if you are indeed the publisher, you probably shouldn't be the one to add the links regardless as it raises conflict of interest issues. Falcon8765 (TALK) 12:36 pm, Yesterday (UTC−6)

Blocked for edit warring/three revert rule

Further to your AIV report I've blocked Heatseekeronline for their actions at Namman Muay. Unfortunately you've also gone some way over the maximum three reverts permitted by WP:3RR, so I've had to block you as well (both blocks are for 24 hours). 3RR is a "bright line" rule and always results in blocks, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the edits being edit-warred over. Obvious vandalism is the only exception, and Heatseekeronlin's edits do not fall into this category. The youtube links they were inserting were likely to be inappropriate, but not all youtube links are problematic and your differences were more in the nature of a content dispute.

In the future, please first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you could try dispute resolution or possibly page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. EyeSerenetalk 08:39, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Falcon8765 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is ridiculous, it wasn't just the YouTube links, he was also adding [1] and [2], one a blog and the other a generic muay thai website. He was reverted twice by linkbot, and then myself after looking at the content of the links. He didn't respond and just kept chain adding, leading me to think he was a spammer, as all of his contributions are adding those links to the page. I've been vandal fighting for a long time, and that behavior is typical of EL spammers. Falcon8765 (TALK) 17:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I'm willing to believe that you thought you were reverting spam/vandalism, but please do be more careful in future. If you're in any doubt about whether your revert is exempt from 3RR, leave it, ask another editor, go to a noticeboard or request protection or something. It often helps to remember that you're not the only editor capable of reverting the edit and others will do so if it comes to their attention and they concur that it needs to be reverted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, that's exactly what I would have done, but it was 1AM CST and no one else was reverting on Huggle that I saw. I maybe should have asked on a noticeboard, but at 1 in the morning my message would just be up there for 30+ minutes before getting a response and a vandal/spammer could just add links with impunity. If I had made a mistake, I invite others to point them out to me on the top of my talk page, but there wasn't even so much as an edit summary in response. I've seen hundreds of spammers behaving in exactly the same manner and have never been accused of having a content dispute over links before because of it, out of hundreds of AIV reports. Falcon8765 (TALK) 18:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for unblocking me, though. Falcon8765 (TALK) 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think you were unlucky, but it's always better to err on the side of caution. You could have reported to AIV sooner (no matter what time of day it is, you can normally find an admin there). The worst that could have happened in that situation is the report is declined as premature or out of scope, but, if that happens, it at least gives you a second opinion and if an admin says it's not vandalism, you can stop reverting before you cross that bright line. Anyway, take the block on the chin. It's not the end of the world and any damage it might have done to your reputation will heal in time.
And you're welcome. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:17, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I reported it to AIV as soon as he had added the links past the final warning, where it remained for more than an hour with no comment as it almost always does in the hours I occasionally operate. The times I have done as you suggested, they are instantly rebuffed for not having four warnings. I do appreciate your advice, but any block does damage my reputation to a subset of users on the project, and any future RFA will probably have any number of opposes because of it. I've seen that happen too, looking at RFAs week by week, for similar situations. It's frustrating after contributing hundreds of hours to the project to be blocked, albeit temporarily, for behavior that I would be willing to bet most other experienced vandal fighters would have done. I do understand the rationale behind the block, but the blocking admin not giving me the benefit of a doubt is discouraging. Falcon8765 (TALK) 18:26, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What pushed it over the line for me was your continued blanket reversions with no attempt at discussion. I agree that most of the content that Heatseekeronline was adding was unsuitable (although linkbot is perhaps not the best guide as to content suitability). If you'd initially removed the problematic stuff but left in place the good content (the gallery image of the guy who invented it, for example, seems okay) and then been reverting the readdition of spam, I would have had no quarrel with your actions. I appreciate now that you were acting with only the best motives, but the reason I didn't give you the benefit of doubt at the time is that, by doing none of the above, you gave me nothing to work with. Even a note in your AIV report - "I believe this guy's spamming, but if not I may inadvertently have gone over 3RR" - would have shown you were aware of the difference between dealing with potentially unsuitable content and vandalism.
That said, in the light of your explanation I have no problem with HJ Mitchell's unblock. Don't worry about your reputation - many of our best editors/admins have at least one in their block log and they're soon forgotten (especially when unblock requests are accepted for a good reason, as yours was). As long as you adopt a slightly more cautious approach to serial blanket reversion in future then you'll be fine. Best, EyeSerenetalk 08:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. In cases of ambiguous edits that aren't clearly problematic, I always attempt to discuss it with the user in question. I didn't append a note to the AIV report because it was fairly obvious that it was spam from my point of view. The images were all deleted for licensing problems too. Falcon8765 (TALK) 20:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits of "Namman Muay" page

I've been asked by Mr.ANTHONY SALCEDO, CEO of CompetitiveAce (http://www.competitiveace.com) which is the only "Namman Muay" brand promoter in USA, to edit and add some images, videos, and links to the official "Namman Muay" wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namman_Muay). Here is a little discription of "Namman Muay" for your knowledge.

Namman Muay (or 'Muay Thai Boxing Liniment or oil') is a herbal liniment made from botanical products from Thailand. Its main active ingredients are known to reduce inflammation and aid in blood circulation.[citation needed] A side benefit is that the wintergreen scent is believed to open nasal passages thus helping to improve oxygen intake while increasing alertness.

I uploaded 3 images he gave with legal copyrights,

However later I found that these images are requested to be deleted by moderators. These images are uploaded under copyrights of the mentioned photographers/company and they represent the brand "Namman Muay". Especially the brand logo (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Product_Image_Ad_For_Facebook.jpg) is owned by CompetitiveAce itself.

And I added some videos and links,

1st link redirects to the brand's owner, CompetitiveAce. Admins have flagged this as a "inappropriate external link". Please check the site if you doubt, "Namman Muay" is property of CompetitiveAce. It is the most important link of all. 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th links are articles regarding "Namman Muay" please recheck them. 5th, 6th links are videos regarding "Namman Muay" applied on boxers please recheck them.

So, please be kind enough to check the facts again before deleting everything that user contributes to wikipedia having the thought of improving an important article, in this case for the boxers worldwide. I'm hoping to improve this article by adding some more images and videos if I have your support in this matter.

Please contact Mr.ANTHONY SALCEDO, CEO of CompetitiveAce for more information. Thanks, Heatseekeronline (talk) 02:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. I understand your concerns, but unfortunately Wikipedia has a policy against conflicts of interest, as you clearly have, detailed here. Editing with a conflict of interest is discouraged. The first two links you've listed, and possibly the YouTube links as well are acceptable, but Muay Thai is Life doesn't clearly have any direct relevance. Additionally, the images are being potentially deleted because we don't have permission directly from the copyright holder, the method of affirming such permission is detailed here. The images probably will be kept if copyright info can be verified. Falcon8765 (TALK) 03:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying. I've updated the images with copyrights. http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/NammanMuay.htm This is the source where the images came from. They were photographed by the photographers for CompetitiveAce.com. I updated these on the images. And I need to know why you removed http://www.competitiveace.com from the external links? How come the Namman Muay brand's official website inappropriate for this page? Heatseekeronline (talk) 01:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did not remove competitiveace from the external links, someone else did. Make sure that you have actual proof of the copyright as outlined by WP:IOWN. The pics will probably be deleted from Commons, as Commons is for freely distributable images. Falcon8765 (TALK) 19:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Falcon8765. I mailed the request to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org for 3 images. I'll inform you if I have a problem again. Heatseekeronline (talk) 09:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brains matter sourced material

I removed them because of the notability of the sections they referred to, or they just referred back to the Brains Matter site. (124.168.9.98 (talk) 03:49, 27 November 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

The Brains Matter site is an acceptable source for information about itself. Falcon8765 (TALK) 03:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps poor choice of words on my part - more that the article was not very encyclopaedic and I'm concerned about the notability of the article - referring back to the Brains Matter site makes it seem like a walled garden rather than something notable.(124.149.54.87 (talk) 12:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Hmm. I don't really know enough about it to make an informed decision, might want to start a discussion on Talk:Brains Matter. Falcon8765 (TALK) 05:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sunset/Sunrise edit wars

A new edit warring episode over the scientific explanation of the sunset and sunrise coloring has started, involving The Good Doctor Fry and Wanbli-g53, which I suspect to be his/her sockpuppet. You may be interested in participating in the discussion going on here. Regards, Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi. .Hw abt adding a lock for protecting unnecessay bad and filthy edits abt Asin in her profile in wiki. . .I dont knw how to add a lock tats y asking u fr help. . .Hope u consider ma request. . .Thank u. . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijay536 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

My new username

Do you like my new username? WAYNESLAM 02:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny Illinois high schools

You must be one of those really modest people that the rest of us can never hope to emulate. Now, that's such an over-the-top statement coming from someone with whom you've never had an exchange, that you might think it sarcastic. It's not; it's speculative.

You see, I noticed that you had done some categorization of some stubs on some high school articles that I had created. Now I must admit, I not only do not understand categories, I don't even care to learn anything about them. But they must be important, because they're on just about every article. So seeing as you did these, almost automatically (or so it looks to me), and because you are not (as far as I know) a bot, I thought I'd drop you a barnstar. And guess what? There's actually a barnstar for categorization (see below). So I go to your user page, and unlike everyone else on the planet, you don't have your barnstars on display. A newbie? I asked myself. So I check your edit history--you've got more edits than I'll have even if I outlive Methusalah. (sp.?) So I'm deducing that over the years, you've gotten more barnstars than you can shake a stick at (whatever the hell that means), but you are some kind of Wikipedian supernumerary or some such, and either do not wish to or have taken a vow not to display them (not that those are mutually exclusive principles). Well, fine, then, here's another one for you to delete into the cyber-dustbin. Whether you want it or not, you clearly deserve it. HuskyHuskie (talk) 03:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The Categorisation Barnstar
For making possible the guilt-free creation of articles by those of us Wikipedians who are either too ignorant or too apathetic to properly categorize them, because you will do it for us, I give you this Categorization Barnstar. HuskyHuskie (talk) 03:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate it. Just doing what I can to help maintain the project. Categories are helpful browsing tools and are also useful for generating article lists and the like, so all pages need them. As far as barnstars go, yeah I've gotten a bunch but don't feel the need to trumpet them to the world or anything like that. Regardless, I appreciate your kind words and will take your barnstar with pride :) lol. Falcon8765 (TALK) 21:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Ramadan page

Falcon8765, my name is David D'Onofrio and i have been trying to put up a wiki page for David Ramadan that you reviewed. Please let me know how i can get this page published, i have used information from his sites, with his permission, to populate this page:

Dear Mr. D’Onofrio,

Thank you for your e-mail. You are hereby permitted to use all of the following for publishing on the web including but not limited toWikipedia.com: my biography (copy of which is published on my website: www.davidramadan.com); my info as listed on my LinkedIn page (http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidRamadan); any/all of my TV and Radio Appearances, some of which are already published on line; pictures and other factual business and political information.


Ddonofrio (talk) 12:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC) David D'Onofrio, 12/2/10[reply]

Beirut, Lebanon, Abu Dhabi, UAE, New Delhi, India, Reston, Virginia, USA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddonofrio (talk • contribs) 12:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be utilized, the copyrighted text has to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License. Otherwise it has to be removed as other licenses aren't very compatible with what Wikipedia does. Falcon8765 (TALK) 17:49, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have had Mr. Ramadan send that in to the permission-en AT wikimedia DOT com address. Hopefully that will resolve this. Thank you for your help Ddonofrio (talk) 18:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Will most likely be fine once permission is received as outlined above. Falcon8765 (TALK) 18:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Article Deleted

{{help me}} Hi there Falcon. I got your message about my article on Flotrack getting deleted and I wanted to just get some more information about that. I am a huge newbie, so please bear with me. I understand that the article was deleted because of a lack of notability, among other things. I looked at the pages on how to write a good article on a notable topic, but I'm not quite sure how I missed the mark. I appreciate your help and apologize for the inconvenience. Technician29 (talk) 22:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technician29, you don't need to use a 'helpme' when you leave a note on another users' talk page - Falcon8765 will see your message. You only need to use {{helpme}} on your own talk page, to get attention from helpers. So, I've cancelled it out.  Chzz  ►  22:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Chzz— Preceding unsigned comment added by Technician29 (talk • contribs)

Hey, sorry your article got deleted, hope you don't get discouraged! I tagged the article because it didn't say how the website was notable, for example "the site received a webby" or "the New York times had this to say" etc. There are a number of resources to help with such things like WP:AFC or WP:HELPDESK. Let me know if you need any more help. Falcon8765 (TALK) 23:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, category:websites is full of examples. Falcon8765 (TALK) 23:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I understand now. Thanks so much!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Technician29 (talk • contribs)

I've found some articles from different news sites referencing the website that I wrote the article about. Does this mean I allowed to create the article again? If so, is there any way I can get the content back from the old article? Thanks --Technician29 (talk) 16:38, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. Ask the deleting admin, they'll help ya out :). Falcon8765 (TALK) 18:42, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Academic Chronicle

Hi, thanks for writing on my page. You asked for a source, and I have given one - the article on this chronicle in the EMC. I realise that this stub is quite extraordinarily stubby, but I think it is worth keeping at least for the moment, till we see what the Russian literature people do with it. (Russian lit is not my field - I come at this from a different angle.) --Doric Loon (talk) 13:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Fixing the 25U page!

Thank-you for fixing my 25U info page.. I had NO clue how to do it properly, but I wanted the my MOS to have info about it. It is a mission critical MOS, and besides 25B, which focuses more on software and computers themselves, one of the more "brainwracking" jobs in Signals.

JMiller111981 (talk) 14:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)JMiller111981[reply]

From DShavit, about page " LED HEADLINER "

Hi Falcon,

..thank you for your contibution. The question for us was to disclose only non confidential technical information , without mixing them with confidential information we do have. Fortunatly, there were 2 new, and now freely available patents from Ford & Johnson Controls enabling us to base this technological article on a serious base. Please remove your question marks about notability and missing citations, if you feel confortable with the new citations listed.

Best regards, Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshavit (talk • contribs) 14:13, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you connected with the article's subject? Falcon8765 (TALK) 04:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.If you google "LED in Headliner" you will find about 852'000 hints, most are forums interested to know how improve the manual processes, which are used by privates, or to substitute the high cost glassfiber solution used in RollsRoyce type cars. There is 1 small start up company (3 employees) worldwide (www.sun-tec.ch) working on an automated interlayer solution, and it is too early to name a car brand. So we can delete the article and wait for a bigger company to write (like about cars: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/VW_Phaeton)about this option. If wikipedia articles about new technological steps, before getting informed worldwide, is of interest... I am not totally neutral, but I can inform. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshavit (talk • contribs) 16:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would be fine with keeping the article, however, I assume you are aware of the conflict of interest guidelines, as you have been messaged about them in the past. Falcon8765 (TALK) 17:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Falcon, Thank you very much, I did inrich the article mentioning different companies in that field today and I would like to encrease this information with respect to all ongoing work worldwide. This can only be done by newest patent information available to all of us, because this is the only information which may be disclosed yet. With respect to all pics, I do own SUN-TEC and I do own these pics. About conflict of interest: I can only try my best to be neutral or delete the article. As I said, nobody else will disclose what is moving on. My questions are: What shall I do else to get the article officially clean? If clean, who is allowed to remove these question marks on top of it? Thanks a lot, dshavit(at)sun-tec.ch —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshavit (talk • contribs) 23:59, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If that is indeed the case, and the only information available about this subject is patent information, it might be better to wait until further information becomes available. And as any article would have to- and apparently does - use original research it probably shouldn't continue. Falcon8765 (TALK) 01:36, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Falcon, I will integrate more links to different headliner articles (which are written by competitors to each other) getting the article to a wider type of fundament. As pHD student I have written articles in different research journals and patents have always been accepted as serious literature. What is wrong with patent lit.? (I do use links to patents disclosed by the official federal Swiss Patent Database http://ep.espacenet.com/)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshavit (talk • contribs) 07:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand how it can be confusing. Patents are primary sources and you have to draw your own inferences from them. That poses a problem as one individual may come to a different conclusion based upon the same source. Lots of different stuff to remember, I know. So, unless reliable third-party sources can be found, which you have implied don't exist at this point in time in the development of the technology, I'm not sure what can be done to have the article meet standards. Falcon8765 (TALK) 16:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do optimise therminology, encreasing non patent literature and mention research groups working on all different solutions for a composite LED Headliner. I will get the information density fixed on highest level. Please take into account, that Bentley is disclosing on wikipedia its fiber optik starlight headliner without any literature at all. Thank you.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshavit (talk • contribs) 10:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I learned how to sign, now..Dshavit (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm entirely sympathetic, but we have to have those third party sources as one of the core tenets of the encyclopedia is verifiability. It presents a lot of problems if we simply take everyone's word for it that there content is true, though I don't doubt yours is. Falcon8765 (TALK) 15:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New messages at Talk:Periyapatna

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Talk:Periyapatna's talk page.

Thank you for the feedback

Hi Falcon

Thanks so much for your feedback about the Rail Safety Act article. I worked hard on it. I thought it looked OK in the end.

Thanks again and take care.

Transaus (talk) 11:18, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Happy Holidays!

          Happy Holidays!
Dear Falcon8765,
Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;)
Love,
--Meaghan [talk] ≈ 15:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Falcon8765&oldid=403710928"