Jump to content

User talk:Xanchester/5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

By topic
DYK (1 • 2) • Signpost • WikiLove

By date
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating The Sense of Beauty, So God created Manchester!

Wikipedia editor Ironholds just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for this great article :)

To reply, leave a comment on Ironholds's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

A simple question

Hello

I am new to Wikipedia, so I have a simple question which I'd appreciate if you help me find its answer. Here it is: Am I right to understand that I am not allowed to comment on the contributor and must only comment on the contribution itself?

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 06:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that editors should comment on contributions, not contributors. But the problem with labeling a good faith edit as vandalism, is that it implies that the editor is a vandal. Even if you strongly disapprove of an edit, unless an edit is obviously vandalism, it's best to avoid the term. It's not conducive to resolving content disputes. As Wikipedia's policy on civility states, "referring to a user's good-faith edits as vandalism may lead to their feeling unfairly attacked," so remember to be cautious.--sgcm (talk) 13:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, SGCM
You said this once in your 3O, I heard it and it is done and over. If I wanted an appeal on your 3O, I would have said so or would have employed other venues of appeal. My question was about the recent activities in my user page (not talk page) but if you are not comfortable with me, I will not bother you any further.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 16:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! I sincerely apologize. It was an honest misunderstanding (my only encounter with you had been via 3O, so I thought you were asking about the 3O request). I'll be more than happy to offer advice. What specifically on your user page are you referring to? If it's about the the vandalism by anon IPs on your userpage, just revert it and ignore it. If they repeatedly pester you after they've been warned, report it to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. An administrator has recently protected your userpage, so it shouldn't be a problem anymore.--sgcm (talk) 16:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, again. That was very sweet of you. Thanks. Don't worry, I assumed good faith in you. (Actually, to be accurate, I assumed you saw that another revert has occurred in the disputed article and so I thought your comment is natural.) Now, since my last reply I took action on asking my questions elsewhere. So, no worries on that either. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 17:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for A Year in the Wild

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:HA Schult

You may now have a look at Talk:HA_Schult#Suggestions_for_improving_the_paragraphs. Wikiwiserick (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are still problems concerning the content of this article. Wikiwiserick (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/The Sense of Beauty at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

Template:Did you know nominations/Stanisław Baranowski Spitsbergen Polar Station

Thanks. Could you confirm whether the second article (on Stanisław Baranowski) which I've just finished expanding is ok, to make it a 2-article DYK? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

selfedit at DRN Jolla talk

Selfedit: I am sorry I have written For me it is OK. thx and night, will be put into article by Monday night, but not tomorrow. It was great pleasure to meet you! :) Ocexyz (talk) 00:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC) but that was the mistake as I was quite tired already after several hours. This part is for me OK: >>>Jolla Oy (commonly called Jolla Mobile) is an independent Finland-based smartphone manufacturer start-up continuing the development of the Linux-based mobile operating system previously known as MeeGo. Jolla intends to announce its first smartphone product, equipped with Mer project's <<< But in fact can't agree with last words, because, the Mer is not an operating system now yet, this is not the full Linux distribution what your proposal suggest - this is against WP:V and WP:SOURCES. Also there is no customer user interface by the Mer WP:SOURCES at all. Only the MeeGo UI/UX fork described for easier understanding as Jolla's own UI. There is no source which would state this way - "operating system" used here is ambiguous and suggesting to reader something what does not exist. I also have mentioned above already that the Mer this is not any Linux distribution so far. However the goal of the project is being MeeGo 2.0, but now only "the core distribution" is what is (1) confirmed by the Mer site and several loud and clear statements of them (2) declared by Jolla with "using the Mer core" or "based on the merproject" (3) clear and not ambiguous. The Mer in this Jolla context mentioned as "operating system" is strong belief and strongly supported of Dark Almöhi and Bahaltener but it is only the opinion not the fact. We are obligated for WP:NPOV Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. This policy is nonnegotiable and all editors and articles must follow it. The article can't be biased to promote the Mer project as the full operating system when in fact and by confirmed sources it is not WP:SOURCES. Also WP:VALID While it is important to account for all significant viewpoints on any topic, Wikipedia policy does not state or imply that every minority view or extraordinary claim needs to be presented along with commonly accepted mainstream scholarship. There is no any hidden secret the Mer Linux as full linux ditribution with complete UI, only the Mer core, which is more Linux kernel with some basic libraries. We do not take a stand on these issues as encyclopedia writers, for or against; we merely omit them where including them would unduly legitimize them, and otherwise describe them in their proper context with respect to established scholarship and the beliefs of the greater world. Also I have decided to say this as in consequence in future edits it could happen that wherever MeeGo would appear it would be long discussion "but we have agreed this in fact is the Mer operating system". But this is the Mer core WP:SOURCES. Dark Almöhi claims the Mer has the text console so this is Linux operating system full distribution. But no normal customer would be able to make any single call or SMS check having only Linux text console with prompt, so s/he would have to call libraries one by one and define a phone number as a parameter for libraries, etc. etc. So we can assume we have agreed the first part but the last part have not been solved. Sorry, but I see no other solution, to avoid future problems. Ocexyz (talk) 09:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC) Ocexyz (talk) 10:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DRN proposals

I regrouped everything and removed the previous "Discussion" section, as I hope this is not a controversial change. If you disagree, please restore it. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 12:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CBS Records

Norton is not waiting to make a comment on the dispute regarding CBS Records. He is posting the disputed material again which I reverted. Steelbeard1 (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing the info regarding Norton being banned from creating new articles. Should that be mentioned in the discussion we are having now? 71.238.112.8 Steelbeard1 (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If Norton continues to resist mediation, can any admin action be taken against him? Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

DYK for IBM Mira

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Sense of Beauty

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Nature's Microworlds

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PIGS

Hello, unfortunately I had to be away for work these days and I could not participate in the final discussion. However, I support the solution that has been found and I really wanted to thank you for your valuable mediation.--Naumakos (talk) 19:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outside(ish) opinion

You had provided a third opinion before at List of God of War characters and I was hoping I could get another outside opinion to the same page. There's a current discussion (though nothing's been posted since August 28th) here that goes over some points. If you want to take a look at the points addressed and their differences, they're here (my proposed version) and here (Bluerim's proposed version). --JDC808 ♫ 01:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DRN v. user talk pages

Hello! I noted that You removed the "or on users' talk pages" statement I added recently. This wording was supposed to document the current practice, so you might probably open a discussion at WT:DRN, if you have concerns over it. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clinical Research

Hey.... Thanks for reverting edits on the article. But does that mean that we should have an article called as - Clinical research in India?. I think this article is needed. Thanks. Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will do it shortly. It is in fact needed article. There are many positive and negative reactions in the media as well. Thanks. Abhijeet Safai (talk)

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "CBS Records". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 12 September 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 15:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The message on your talk page didn't appear constructive? Say why, instead of removing it.

Following message was posted in your talk page as per your request. Instead of removing, please say why it didn't appear constructive to you? It is equally as important to say why. No hard feelings. Peace on you.

800 lb gorilla/americans

The definition of 800 pound gorilla suits the behavior of Americans. The world would accept the following suggested metaphor/cliché including some intelligent Americans. Truth is not an insult, but truth. Does U.S. terrorize the world? Expect an election of acceptance or rejection before removing it. 

"800 pound gorilla" is an American English expression for a person or organization 

or Americans who elect and empower the world's terrorist organization (U.S.)  

so powerful that it can act without regard to the rights of others or the law.
It should be obvious why calling the United States "the world's terrorist organization" on a page completely unrelated to American foreign policy is considered disruptive.--sgcm (talk) 18:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to comment at Monty Hall problem RfC

Because of your interest in dispute resolution,, I am inviting you to comment on the following RfC:

Talk:Monty Hall problem#Conditional or Simple solutions for the Monty Hall problem?

This dispute has been going on for over ten years and there have been over 1,300,000 words posted on the article talk page (by comparison, all of the Harry Potter books together total 1,084,170 words). Over the years the dispute has been through multiple noticeboards, mediators, and even the Arbitration Committee without resolving the conflict, so a lot of wisdom is needed here. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

Dear SGCM, Please respond to my question here when you have a moment:

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard

Thank you, Settdigger (talk) 07:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Xanchester. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard.
Message added 06:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mrt3366(Talk?) (New thread?) 06:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, I've exhausted most other ways to seek wider input. I went to ANI before the whole shebang. They told me to take it to WP:DRN. You can check the archive if you want. There is currently a report in WT:COUNTRY. All in vain. They are unnecessarily taking issue with such trivial (in the sense that it's obviously helpful) thing. Mrt3366(Talk?) (New thread?) 07:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
replied. Mrt3366(Talk?) (New thread?) 12:14, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xanchester/5&oldid=1254573700"