User talk:117Avenue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Jimmy Wong[edit]

Jimmy Wong's birthdate can be found at this IMDB page: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source, it relies on users' submissions, it probably has the wrong date because the Wikipedia article had the wrong date. Please read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 02:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Okay, found it. His birthday can be found on his official Facebook page: (states March 28, 1987). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
And that facebook page is linked to from the YouTube page, hard to argue with that. 117Avenue (talk) 08:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Notice of ANI discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Legal threat by Csisscrs. Thank you. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 23:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Concision of Lead of Economic Interventionism[edit]

Dear Avenue,

Reading the list of WikiProject: Politics contributors, I noticed you are an active user partly specializing in economics: would you like to offer your opinion on my concision of the lead of

Duxwing (talk) 17:46, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


If this is the case, I'd prefer to see a consistent categorization approach to all member articles of all Alberta municipal categories. The town and village cats should be consistent with all the others, which was my biggest beef yesterday. Hwy43 (talk) 02:40, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. When I instituted it in April all the municipality type categories either had all the municipalities listed in them (Ponoka in towns), or were further sub-categorized (Wetaskiwin in cities). 117Avenue (talk) 02:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't all cities then be redundantly listed twice at Category:Cities in Alberta then? And same for all other municipality type cats? Hwy43 (talk) 03:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Possibly. I don't know. 117Avenue (talk) 03:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Given neither of us know, I have asked the question. Hwy43 (talk) 08:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


Why would someone want to further a stereotype that simply isn't true? I notice that on Toronto's page there isn't "Centre of the Universe" as a nickname. Nicknames for people, places, and things come and go as their relevance dictates. Edmonton simply isn't "Deadmonton", and why someone would want this on the go-to source for a user when looking up the city, I have no idea. Are you telling me that I could go edit Toronto's page right now to say "commonly known as 'The Centre of the Universe" and not a single person would have an issue and agree with me that "...even disparaging nicknames are acceptable on Wikipedia"? Edmonton is simply not "Deadmonton"; no self-respecting Edmontonian with any ounce of civic pride at all would ever refer to us as such. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwc.goebel (talkcontribs) 06:14, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion ETS LRT[edit]

Why did you delete the recent addition to the LRT page from Edmonton? It was backed by sources and is relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Are you refering to this edit? In your addition you wrote "the likely LRV is probably either a Bombardier Flexity tram, or an Alstom Citadis tram." This is original research. In such a highly contested article original research gets removed. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 02:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Disney XD (Canada) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

  • The above is an invalid, inappropriate warning. A 3RR breach requires 4 reverts in a 24-hour period and 117Avenue has only made 3 reverts in 10 days at Disney XD (Canada). His edits do not constitute edit-warring, let alone approach a 3RR breach. I have asked the editor who left this warning to reconsider it,[1] but he has refused. --AussieLegend () 17:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Users are free to remove such messages from their own talk pages if they so choose - whether because they feel they are invalid or for any other reason whatsoever. Do note, however, that I plan to file a report if the activity that resulted in this message being posted continues. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@AussieLegend:, unfortunately their edits on the XD article do meet the definition of a slow edit-war. Yes, some random IP's continually add poor information, but since it's not formally vandalism and thus not exempt, it has met the definition of edit-warring (no, it has not met the definition of a 3RR violation. Logistically, only about 3/4 of admins will block for it. Now, if the edits were vandalism, it would be a different story, of course. So, please be careful in suggesting that the warning was invalid - by letter of the law, it is valid (yeah, the IP is also edit-warring, we know that) the panda ɛˢˡ” 10:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
The IP's edits were inappropriate, so reversions were appropriate. {{uw-3rr}} was used to warn this editor when the editor hasn't even come close to 3RR so that warning was inappropriate. As I told Dogmaticeclectic, at worst he should have used an edit-warring warning, like ({{uw-ew}}). However, given that 117Avenue is an editor of good standing, Dogmaticeclectic should really have left a more personal note. WP:DTTR may only be an essay, but it is a reasonable one. Of course, if we bring reason into it, he should have done what most reasonable people would have done, and that is not to leave a warning at all, since none was warranted. --AussieLegend () 10:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Canada House standings[edit]

I'd like to continue the discussion of Template talk:Canada House standings. I still think the current format can be improved upon and believe we can work together to do so. - Montréalais (talk) 03:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)