Jump to content

User talk:Veriss1

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Veriss1 (talk | contribs) at 06:29, 18 December 2017. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I like a tidy talk page so may remove a section once I no longer need it

Rick Perry's GPA

It's listed incorrectly in his Wikipedia article. If you look at his transcript (http://www.scribd.com/doc/61684192/Rick-Perry-s-Texas-A-M-Transcript) and calculate the value of the grades associated with credit hours, you'll see 139 grade points and 70 credit hours, or a GPA of 1.985714. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Highpitchedthomas (talk • contribs) 01:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The GPA of 2.5 is listed correctly if you would look at the cited reliable source for that statement. Besides, your math is incorrect, the system was changed part way through his college career. Thus the danger of SWAGs.
I decided some time ago that I will no longer contribute to political articles so I have zero interest in debating this issue here.
I will tell you though that there was a very lengthy debate about Scientific Wild Ass Guesses (SWAGs) and Perry's GPA that should be easy to find in the talk page archives. The GPA of 2.5 was taken directly from a reliable source. Please take your concerns to the article talk page. Thank you. Veriss (talk) 02:30, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For giving me one in 2010 (Yes, 2010), you get one back! Sorry for the lateness! J (t) 03:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asma al-Assad

Hi, I don't want to get into an edit-war on her Talk page. I actually agree with S's removal of some of E's post. The Talk page should not be used as a forum for her to discuss her personal views about Syria and the subject. I did not like his edit summary, though, which I thought was attacking, and I left a message on his Talk page to that effect. I'll leave it up to you whether to leave in the material.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and appreciate both your and S's positions as I too tire of E's lectures. I normally take a very dim view of editing other's posts though except for the most extreme policy violations. I'll look around for some policy on that practice, if you have any leads, I would appreciate them.
If the pruning should be reverted, I will revert it. I agree, his edit summary was a personal attack and to make matters worse, we all know how volatile she is. Cheers,Veriss (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think her comments are a policy violation, just a violation of Talk page guidelines, which is why I haven't reverted your reversion (heh). At the same time, the combination of the Talk page guidelines, the sensitivity of these particular issues, and a bit of WP:COATRACK thrown in for added flavor, makes me more inclined to agree with the trimming. And she does have a habit of making these kinds of inappropriate comments.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have reviewed WP:TPOC and find this may be in a grey area given the long, disruptive history of the user E in question making posts that some may wonder are just vehicles for propaganda. Normally I do not condone editors changing the content of other's talk page posts but will undo my reversion of S in this case since his action may be within policy, though it appears to be quite a stretch, and I am of course, not an adjudicator. If E protests, she may very well have grounds. They both have very short fuses, here's to hoping this does not blow up into another ugly drama fest. Cheers, Veriss (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are a model of moderation. I agree with your analysis. I'll hope along with you.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, "hope is not a method". We should prime our fire extinguishers. Veriss (talk) 20:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Note: The initial discussion had the user's actual names, Sayerslle and Les Etoiles de Ma Vie, plainly posted. After the discussion, I redacted the full names and replaced them with "S" and "E" to avoid embarrassing the editors who's apparent misconduct was being discussed and because I did not want to bring drama to my personal talk page. I am not an Admin and am merely an editor so have no requirement to archive or publicly display all of my discussions with other users. The diff of when I redacted the user names is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AVeriss1&diff=495586067&oldid=495102491 (→Asma al-Assad: replaced certain user names with initials in discussion). I make this note since it was mentioned in an ANI. There were no "code names", merely a redaction to save the two users "face" as described above.) Veriss (talk) 10:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the irony. He bears mention that he did not want to bring drama to his personal page, and yet, he engages in talking about other editors, which is basically laying a welcome mat for drama. And then he has the grace to say that he wanted to save "face" for the editor(s) they conspire about? Contradictory and foul. Les Etoiles de Ma Vie (talk) 10:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Followup: The ANI closed, amicably, I think. She and I have different perceptions concerning some things and I think we should leave it at that. In hindsight, instead of initials I should've use the more generic "he" and "she" but I had no idea that using initials could be construed as using codewords. As far as I am concerned, this incident is closed and we should all move on to more important things; such as improving the article. Veriss (talk) 06:38, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Copiapó mining accident

Was just browsing the article (And admiring the evolutionary process) and saw the GA. How abut trying for GA again? Could jump to FA soon enogh.Lihaas (talk) 09:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lihaas, long time no see. I thought about it but the problem will be that there will be issues with dead links to cites or citations to pay-to-view sites. The English language newspaper that was the source for many things rolls their articles to 'subscriber only' after a time. It would take a huge amount of work to update and replace all of those citations. I'll help where I can but don't think I have the time to lead it like before. Veriss (talk) 13:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise here, i was just browsing through some pages that took an [awesome] evolutionary process and then saw this one. Fun times too ;) (better than political articles on here, which i too have eased off on)
To the point, Deadlinks could be a tough [but not impossible] ask. Subscription is not a hindrance though, WP doesnt forbid it. we just need to tag it as such.
But we can start on the easier changes per the last FA.Lihaas (talk) 07:32, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was updating my watchlist and counted over 30 supporting articles for that incident. That was a huge project and it is somewhat sad that after so much effort it never made GA. Veriss (talk) 16:59, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It took me awhile, but I finally got around to editing the 2010 Copiapó mining accident article. It needs a lot of work! I made a post [1] on the talk page asking the previously active editors to help update it as it is in my mind, an important article. I will post a talkback link on your talk page to link you here if you haven't already seen my post on the article's talk page. I look forward to working with you again on it. Veriss (talk) 10:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
aIm interested in this. With time now passed we can update what happened to the miners, etc.
Also per FA, we would need more than news sources. Which should be available now. the ITV documentary has stuff and im sure the inquiry by Chile and others stuff will be there.115.240.16.205 (talk) 04:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Piers Morgan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tabloid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Veriss (talk) 07:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

Hi,

Would appreciate your comments here. Cheers --Muhammad(talk) 16:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I commented even though I have no idea how I was selected to comment on an article or area I don't recall ever contributing to. Veriss (talk) 07:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your honest feedback. I found your name in a list of users who comment on RfC and selected at random --Muhammad(talk) 16:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tidiness; alert

Since I come to alert you to objections to two of your deletions, seeing your "tidiness" policy certainly makes me yet more wary. One person's tidiness can be manipulating another person's "sense of how the editor interacts with the community". Well, enough said. You're alerted (on two fronts). I haven't absorbed all that the Talk page there, on which you've been already active, could tell me I feel. I hope I've done a reasonable, if long, job on my two bits. Sorry about length. Best. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 07:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. Wow, just wow. This is MY inbox, not yours. If you want to see what's been posted here, then you are welcome to sift through this page's edit history. While you do so, you may notice that I subscribe to at least one weekly newsletter that becomes clutter once I have read it. If you are curious if there are any controversies or drama associated with my account, you are free to creep through my talk page history and contributions. I am pretty sure that I have not removed any editor's comments from my talk page in well over a year. I make no apologies for maintaining a tidy talk page and if you have problems with it, please post any policy links indicating that I should not. I take issue with your insinuations but I refuse to stoop to address them.
2. Welcome to my humble, but neat, talk page.
3. I watch that page so there is no need to bring any issues about my actions there to my personal talk page unless you feel that I have not responded promptly. In your case, I responded in less then four hours. I normally check my watch list at least once a day.
4. I try to discuss article issues on the talk page of the article in question so that other editors who may be watching the article are kept in the loop. Veriss (talk) 10:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry for my quite unpleasant tone. I hope you'll accept my apology. I was feeling preemptively defensive, preparing myself for the arguments I in fact got. But that's no excuse. I'll do my best there to address them; or let them stand much as I disagree. Coming here was a courtesy; though I wasn't courteous. ... On. OK, I hope. Swliv (talk) 04:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough and accepted. Thanks for coming back to clear the air. Veriss (talk) 06:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes

Per the WP:RFC and WP:FRS guidelines, I respectfully request your feedback regarding a question of law.

Should the Ugg boots trademark disputes article include example cases of counterfeit consumer goods? Is the counterfeiting of brand name goods a "trademark dispute" when the counterfeiters are taken to court? Also, an editor has claimed that the introduction of example cases of counterfeiting "dilute" the discussion about whether the word "UGG" is a generic term, and therefore ineligible for trademark protection.

Please respond to the survey here with "Support" if you believe counterfeiting is a trademark dispute when taken to court, or "Oppose" if you believe the reverse is true. Thank you. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 13:01, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:San Jose Mina - Mision cumplida - screen capture.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:San Jose Mina - Mision cumplida - screen capture.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. eh bien mon prince (talk) 03:26, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a link in the licensing summary to an article, in Spanish, that discusses that the government will release the video of the rescue to the public domain. Are you a bot are are you human? The link is there. Veriss (talk) 07:06, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I read that, but there's no proof that the copyright owner of that broadcast (possibly the government, surely not Fucatel) actually released the video under a free licence. I will turn the request in a full deletion discussion, but more tangible evidence than a dated news release from a third party is needed to ascertain its actual copyright status.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 12:46, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There have already been two deletion discussion on the fiile's talk page and both discussions resulted in "keep". Why open a third? (Moved my reply to the linked discussion. No need to reply here)Veriss (talk) 18:59, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: Third (actually fourth) deletion discussion was also a keep. Getting tired of this game and getting tired of Wikipedia's mindless bureaucracy. Veriss (talk) 08:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why file archives are listed

Hi! It's been almost two years but I responded at Talk:Air_France_Flight_4590#Files WhisperToMe (talk) 18:17, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the courtesy. I think I was curious because that was a lot of work on your part. :) Veriss (talk) 18:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome! Remember the two archival websites you can use to preserve sources are http://archive.is and http://webcitation.org. I think archive.is is far easier to use, but some pages don't work on that, so use webcitation for those. The best way is to use both archive.is and webcitation.org when possible. PDF files seem to be only be able to be archived on webcitation, though. Sometimes a website owner has robots.txt which blocks viewing of archives at http://web.archive.org/ so archiving pages on the Internet Archive is good too. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll save this for reference. Very useful info. Thanks again! Veriss (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anytime :) - Archiving webpages is an important aspect of Wikipedia WhisperToMe (talk) 20:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of new religious movements

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of new religious movements. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. This message was delivered manually as RFC bot is currently offline. Thank you. --Tgeairn (talk) 20:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invitation but I chose not to respond for personal reasons. Veriss (talk) 07:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfC to consider

Might you consider offering an opinion on a content dispute between two editors involving the removal of parts of an article on a group of characters in a fictional novel? The discussion is here: Talk:Druids_(Shannara)#BRD_on_recent_large_addition_of_text. Thanks for considering. N2e (talk) 02:22, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I decided not to comment since I do not know much about that genre. Veriss (talk) 07:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's cool. Thanks very much for being willing to serve in the way you do to make Wikipedia better, and for considering the opportunity! Cheers. N2e (talk) 19:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank feature

Look at the contribution history of an article. At the end of each entry you should see things like rollback, sum, x - and at the end thank. If you hover your mouse over thank, it tells you what it does. Frankly, I've never used the feature and wish I could remove it, but that's how it's supposed to work. I'm not sure when it was added but it wasn't that long ago.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:22, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I knew and respected you as a fellow editor long before you were "saddled with being an Admin", a concept you smirked at on Asma al-Assad's talk page :). I respect you for taking on these responsibilities. "You are a better man then I Gunga Din". Veriss (talk) 05:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You were a great help on that article. Do you know that it hasn't even been edited in almost a month, and that edit by an IP was reverted by another editor? Ain't life grand when it's quiet?--Bbb23 (talk) 05:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I know I shouldn't, but I do miss E and S sometimes. Veriss (talk) 06:03, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on an RfC about Living members of deposed royal families and the titles attributed to them on WP

I have opened an RfC about suggested guidelines in the Manual of Style for articles about living members of families whose ancestors were deposed as monarchs of various countries and the titles and "styles" attributed to these living people, at the moment often in a misleading and inaccurate way in my opinion. Please join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies "Use of royal "Titles and styles" and honorific prefixes in articles and templates referring to pretenders to abolished royal titles and their families"[2]Smeat75 (talk) 05:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly care about biographies but I'm a libertarian and have no dog in that fight, nor any interest in the outcome, especially when it concerns royalty. Thank you for inviting me to contribute to the discussion and I wish you all the best of luck. Veriss (talk) 05:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for rollback

Hi Veriss1. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | Talk 15:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello,

You can help determine consensus by commenting at the RfC at Talk:Ta-Nehisi Coates#RfC:_Discipline_issues_in_high_school. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you. Useitorloseit (talk) 19:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello,

You can help determine consensus by commenting at the RfC at Talk:Ta-Nehisi Coates#RfC:_Discipline_issues_in_high_school. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you. Useitorloseit (talk) 19:59, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm here (sort of)

Veriss1, I apologize for my lack of responsiveness, but I've been very busy and then for the last almost two days my Internet access stopped working, and I'm trying to catch up to the behind I was at before. :-) I will look at the article, but I can't promise when that'll be. Regards.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Glad you're back. Veriss (talk) 13:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC United States same-sex marriage map

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 (talk) 09:50, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a libertarian and have no dog in that fight, nor any interest in the outcome. Thank you for inviting me to contribute to the discussion and I wish you all the best of luck. Veriss (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Chile world same-sex marriage map

Please join discussion for how Chile should be colored. Prcc27 (talk) 08:14, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a libertarian and have no dog in that fight, nor any interest in the outcome. Thank you for inviting me to contribute to the discussion and I wish you all the best of luck.

Need help

We need more neutral opinions here. I've followed instructions here and at Wikipedia:Feedback request service and to used the user lists there. I've sent a message for neutral input to everyone active recently and available for 10 per month or more on the lists in the Language and linguistics, Media, the arts, and architecture, Society-sports-culture, Unsorted and All-RFCs lists, none of whom have interacted with me before, that I can remember. Have done my best to act in good faith to try to get more neutral opinions. Please help! Thanx! SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I responded. I'm not sure that I was much help though. Thank you for the invite. Veriss (talk) 07:10, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please help to comment on Talk:Philippines_v._China#rfc_69CFFDB

We need your comment. Please help. Thanks. Toto11zi (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply] 

list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=793602771 -->

by User:Evad37@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=798295391 -->

The Signpost: 18 December 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Veriss1&oldid=815945503"