User talk:FlightTime/Alternate talk page

This is the alternate talk page of
User talk:FlightTime

Could you check my edited user page

@FlightTime: Sorry for bothering you,

Since my previous user page was deemed promotional, I have a edited version up on my sandbox. I wanted you to check it because I don't wish to be blocked again when/if I make it my user page. You can reply on my talk page or the sandbox talk page, if you like.

Sorry If I have been a Pain recently.

Thanks, Upsidedown Keyboard (talk) 14:44, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

@Upsidedown Keyboard: No worries, no bother. Wikipedia has a definite learning curve. Your question would probably have a better response at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous), as more "eyes" could comment. Again welcome to Wikipedia - FlightTime (open channel) 15:02, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Machine Head (album)

@FlightTime: Not sure why you reverted my edit for Deep Purple - Machine Head. The recording date as it is is clearly wrong and my edit was correct (at least as stated in the liner notes for the album). If I'm not allowed to edit for some reason, someone else should.

@Arkngt: Can you explain exactly what "6-21 December 1971" means ? also what source do you have to support this claim ? - FlightTime (open channel) 20:23, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Roy Rogers

@FlightTime: Hello, I'm 73.223.9.134. I was going to add this citation "Smiley Burnette, Movie Partner Of Autry and Rogers, Dies at 55. Charlie Pratt of TV 'Petticoat Junction' Played Roles in Nearly 200 Westerns". New York Times. Associated Press. February 18, 1967. for the edit I did at Roy Rogers page which you keep undoing. But should Roy Rogers's abstract begin with a citation to Smiley Burnette's death? Also, I don't see any citations for Pat Brady, Andy Devine, or George "Gabby" Hayes. Thanks.

@73.223.9.134: Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Help:Referencing for beginners, this will help explain why Wikipedia requires what it requires. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:44, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

@FlightTime: How about now? Also, you didn't answer the second question.

A message from Samuraialien

Samuraialien (talk) 08:37, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Why do you remove legit edits on the Blood Stain Child wiki? You removed all 4 of my edits and removed both edits of another user.

A message from Fands578

I just got flagged for conflict of interest for making an edit to the Arlington, Texas Wikipedia page. I'm the Social Media Manager for the City of Arlington and I work in the City's Office of Communication. The image I uploaded of a City water tower is the City's image. We own the rights to the photo and the new water tower features the current logo. The old Arlington logo should no longer be used on the page. There are several examples of outdated information on this page and we have received complaints about this. It's important to update the page with accurate information and photos that reflect the City as it is today.

Fands578 (talk) 18:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

07/13/17 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fands578 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@Fands578: Are you saying "you do not have a conflict of interest" ? Look we all have rules, and you need to follow ours. You should not be editing that article at all, you need to make edit requests and let an experienced editor who has no connections to Arlington make them for you. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Journey Page

Keep up the good work, thanks. Dave Golland (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

JesseRafe's edit warring

@FlightTime: You seem to have got the wrong end of the stick. I have made reasoned edits to several articles, giving explanations in the edit summary, and User:JesseRafe has been engaged in a campaign of reverting them, providing no explanation for his objections, but simply asserting that my edits were wrong. When I restored my edits, giving further explanation, he once again reverted with no explanation and had the gall to accuse me of edit-warring and of "crusading". I have opened discussions on all the relevant talk pages, given the reasons for my edits, and invite anyone with substantive objections to raise them there. -- 76.15.128.174 (talk) 15:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Just because you "explain" your edit doesn't make it written in stone. Community consensus determines what is included in Wikipedia and just because you think it's important or notable is not a excuse for edit warring. Your edit has been challenged and removed, it is your burden to gain consensus to replace your claim, until consensus is reached, the article does not remain at your version. Good luck and happy editing. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

That's not what WP:BURDEN says. WP:BURDEN relates only to the burden of providing citations for challenged material. Since that's not at issue here, your citing it is a red herring. There is no burden on the person who wishes to edit an article to defend and obtain consensus for his proposed change. To do that is to privilege the current version of every article, which is very much against what WP is about. The burden is on someone who objects to an edit to make a case against it. The status quo of an article does not usually -- or in this case -- represent a consensus, it just represents whatever the second-most-recent editor did, with no discussion. Therefore it is not legitimate to revert to it without discussion. -- 76.15.128.174 (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, that's your interpretation and good luck with that. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

It's not my interpretation, it's what it explicitly says. You have misquoted and misused it, and you don't have the right to do that. In any case, I have opened discussions on all three talk pages, and if JesseRafe has any substantive objections to my edits he can raise them there. Mere assertion won't cut it. If he does not make his case over the next day, and nobody else makes one either, I will re-implement my changes. -- 76.15.128.174 (talk) 22:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)