This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Since you commented on a previously related issue, you may want to comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_College_football#Navboxes_in_bowl_game_articles.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 05:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Much appreciated.  Cjmclark ^{( Contact)} 09:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Looking for input on the discussion here [1]. Thanks.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 00:34, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited AFCA National Championship Trophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John McKay ( 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) 10:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I made the mods at the Legion of Merit page that you have reverted. Would you kindly point to your sources which say the Perera did indeed receive the medal? The official source shown in my explanatory line doeas NOT list him as such. For your convenience, here's the link again: http://www.airforce.lk/pages.php?pages=air_chief_marshal_g_d_perera. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.52.250.110 ( talk) 16:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

The source listed in the article 8 from the text Service Chiefs of India. Achowat ( talk) 16:20, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, it seems that we're talking about different people. The Indian General is mentioned in the WP as beeing an Officer, the Sri Lankan one is not, and there is no evidence of him ever getting the Legion. That is why I moved the Indian to Officer and deleted the Sri Lankan. Now, if we cleared this up, perhaps you would do the appropriate corrections. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.52.250.110 ( talk) 16:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't fully understand the corrections that need to take place, so I'll defer to you. What I saw (and reverted) was simply a removal of sourced material. Achowat ( talk) 16:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.52.250.110 ( talk) 19:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

In case you missed this on my talk: It did seem like it was humour, and I thought about that-- but I have made the opposite error of mistaking ill will for humour a few times and was simply exercising the philosophy of CYA'ing as best I could. No harm, no foul. You know, even in such a thread, this fellow would be of invaluable use.-- Djathinkimacowboy ^{chase me thru the cemetery} 19:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. Achowat ( talk) 19:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Katella High School Gerry Pollet Esperanza Guisán Eccellenza Abruzzo 2008–09 Kumgang Airport Nannhousen Airfield Euler force Arthur Cotton Moore Jeremiah Jenks Bad Gandersheim Airport Sanfebagar Airport Tikapur Airport A. M. Naik Lawrence E. Blume Méribel Airport Lori Goldston Journal of Invertebrate Pathology Dan Frazier JAR (software)

Cleanup Dice Rules Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury Big Oak Tree State Park Merge Google Wallet Non-uniform circular motion Uniform circular motion Add Sources 2007 UEFA European Under-17 Football Championship qualifying round Endocrine disruptor Sportsmen's Lodge Wikify Texas Tax Reform Commission Gerard Donovan BharatBenz Expand Lamm equation ArenaCup IV Nicholas Nickleby

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 04:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello. My name is Dean Camp. My cited information is being deleted and rolled back by Snalwibma. I do not own a computer and used computers at work or in my apartment building when they are available. I do not have an account and he has blocked one of the computers at my school. How can I gain rank, power, and status within the Wikipedia community to protect the upaid labor edits I provided on the Wikipedia Sic article from his repeated deletions? I tried to contact him on his home page talk post. He deleted most of what I wrote and cherry-picked "(7)" for inclusion in his talk edit. I read your site and want general advise on Wikipedia use, etiquette, vandalism, gnome-work, and edit war resolution. I have already read the vandalism site, but I am unsure that sending Snalwibma more information or more requests to cite his sources prior to deleting my own cited sources, cited examples, and edit changes in Sic will be a useful investment of my time given his deletion of my talk post and repeated failure to cite his sources for the changes he makes. My email is gauzeandchess@yahoo.mail. I prefer not to develop a Wikipedia account in order to protect the edits I provided because I do not own a computer or use Wikipedia exclusively from one computer.

I have replied via email. Achowat ( talk) 13:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Full text of email response:

Dean, First let me say that this is remarkably strange for me, responding by email. Part of the idea that has kept Wikipedia going as successfully as it has is that there are two kinds of editors (really). There are WikiDragons, who exist outside of the community, making bold edits and then disappearing; and there is everyone else. Sure we may identify as WikiGnomes or WikiElves or other WikiFauna, but the defining feature of all of them is the existence within the community. For that reason, I ask that you sign up, so that we can carry on this conversation as part of the community. People may have answers that I don’t, and it’ll be far easier to track your contributions if you have a ‘name’ instead of a string of random numbers. There should be no worry about editing on different computers (I edit on my phone, at work, and at home) as long as you just Sign Out before you leave the computer for the day.

Now, on to your concerns: I don’t know exactly what Snalwibma has rolled back and I don’t know what article you’re talking about, so I can’t specifically comment on whether his actions were justified or whether the content you added should have been included in the encyclopedia. What I do know is that Snalwibma is a non-admin rollbacker and therefore, bound by WP:ROLLBACK to only use the feature on blatant vandalism. I’m going to Assume Good Faith and suggest that your content looked like vandalism to Snalwibma, which is why he rolled it back. Again, I’m not familiar enough with the dispute to comment on specifics. I can also tell you that it wasn’t Snalwibma who blocked the IP at your school, as he is not an Admin and doesn’t have that button. Also of note, that more likely than not, if you sign up you’ll be able to edit from School, as very rarely to we block logged-in users accessing the site through blocked IP ranges.

As to gaining “rank, power, and status”, the simple answer is ‘You can’t, none of us can’. Wikipedia (at least the English Wikipedia) doesn’t have ranks or powers or status. Certain editors are given certain tools by the community (Rollbackers, Admins, Crats, Checkusers, Autopatrolled users, oversighters, etc) but those are often describe simply as “No Big Deal.” I have been given the Rollback Tool to help me with my anti-vandalism edits. Some users are given Autopatrolled tools to help them with the creation of new articles. The more complicated answer to “How do I keep my edits from being deleted?” is ‘Be an active member of the Community’. The only way anything ever changes on the project is through Consensus, and you’ll find it much easier to build that consensus on a Talk Page if you have proven yourself valuable to the community.

The Community standards for etiquette, Vandalism, and resolving Edit Wars are going to be more helpful to you than any words I may have, generally. Though, if you have specific questions, I’d be more than happy to answer those.

Gnome work is a little harder to define. There is an article on the subject, but I can tell you that the main defining feature of a WikiGnome is doing little work that would seem insignificant to other editors: fixing Tables, adopting a typo, fixing references, fixing redirects. Things that are important, but not (for lack of a better term) ‘sexy’. It is rewarding to bring an article up to Good or Featured Article status, but being a WikiGnome is all about finding reward in the smaller things that just help the Encyclopedia be a better resource for our readers.

I hope this helps, and feel free to respond on my Talk Page if you have any questions

PS, if you respond to this with another email, I will be posting it on my User Talk, so again, it would be better for you to simply Sign Up Achowat ( talk) 13:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to this, Achowat. All that I have to say on the specifics of the matter is at Sic and Talk:Sic. It's not about vandalism, perceived or otherwise, rather about applying and maintaining normal editorial standards. The addition of long screeds of text that are "well-referenced" is not always in the interests of the article or its readers! SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 14:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Why did you reverse the update about Tea Party Brief? It is valid and easily sourced. Contact info@onepointsix.org to communicate by email 24.10.238.249 ( talk) 06:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

I apologize, but I haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about. I looked through my contributions and saw nothing about a "Tea Party Brief" over the last month or so. Achowat ( talk) 07:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
-- Kumi-Taskbot ( talk) 18:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Fedora". Thank you.

... you forgot to sign here. Cheers and thanks again for the star! - DVdm ( talk) 18:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Uh, a matter of seconds. - DVdm ( talk) 18:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Noted and Template:Unsigned added. Thank you, sir. Achowat ( talk) 18:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Matthew Humberstone School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leonard Hall ( 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) 11:01, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I have seen this [2] and I think you were understandably frustrated and moved to open this issue. Please read my comment, it is vital, but please also accept my apologies for the incivility that I admit occurred. It won't happen again, and if you've studied me so very closely, you know I am an editor of my word. I am sorry it went out of control and hope you will accept this apology. I will apologise to you at Fedora as well.-- Djathink imacowboy 16:22, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Apology fully accepted. We were both frustrated and crossed the line. Funny, since we were both (practically) on the same side. Hopefully this whole sorry ordeal will just serve as a reminder to both of us to be a bit more careful in the tones we take and try to communicate better and for the betterment of the project. Achowat ( talk) 16:27, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

This makes me very happy. It serves no purpose to make excuses, but I wanted you to understand that I was also unfairly taking some personal issues out on you. A friend has died, my sister-in-law is going into a nursing home too. You never deserved such vituperative language or my insults. Cheers for handling this in an understanding way.-- Djathink imacowboy 16:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

My fullest condolensces. Taking a WikiBreak is a hard thing to do, even when you need it. The Community does such a good job with making editor's feel important that it's often hard to remember that we can step away for a day or two without the whole thing going to shit. I know the black-out helped clear my head, and it seems like it did for you, too. Now let's get away from the personal stuff and get back to arguing about the nature of the Quasar Barnstar Achowat ( talk) 16:38, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Ha! That's well said. And my thanks for your condolences. We can use all we can get. Now on to the Quasar!! -- Djathink imacowboy 16:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For excellence in general editing, and for infinite patience with difficult editors (here I sit). -- Djathink imacowboy 18:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, sir. Your kind words are more than enough for me. Achowat ( talk) 18:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Spoken modestly, but deserving of a star nonetheless! Besides, I believe in liberal (but deserved) star awards.-- Djathink imacowboy 20:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

/* History */ Removed ridiculous fanicful "history" of the water balloon. I was playing with water balloons before this "history", as it's hardly an invention at all but must have occurred to everyone who every had a few balloons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.214.96.25 ( talk) 23:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

The reason I've reverted your edits (twice) is because the information is well-sourced and verifiable. Remember, the the standard for inclusion is not whether it's true but rather whether it is verifiable. We are, frankly, bound by what the sources say on the subject, and either adding information that isn't in the sources or removing sourced information both constitute Original Research. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here. Cheers! Achowat ( talk) 17:18, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar! I'm just glad we have these Wikiproject talk pages where we can hash out issues like this. Thanks again, and I hope it sticks!-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞ 19:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.