User talk:Bgwhite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to my talk page
  • I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag or a warning, please assume good faith.
  • If I have erred, don't hesitate to tell me, but being rude will get you nowhere.
  • I will not tolerate any profanity or extreme rudeness. If used in any way, it will be erased and your message not read.

Please Accept My Apologies[edit]

To all members of Wikipedia that have been involved in this case, especially Bgwhite: I'm sincerely sorry for everything: I want to apologize for always giving you guys a hard time with my edits and contributions to any articles here on Wikipedia regarding Jordanian footballers and teams and I sincerely apologize for always ignoring your rules and warnings. I admit I was being selfish, thought I could always get away with it and always have it my way, as well as being too lazy to listen to any of you by ignoring the reasons you provide me as to why some of my edits violate the rules here on this website and ignoring your warnings. I apologize for my rude and selfish behavior. I just wanted to help, and I thought I could by adding more links and references to such articles, but I seriously did not know that using double brackets and this | in the links and references I add was a violation, I thought it wouldn't matter. With all due respect, what's the big deal with that exactly, what harm could be done? Is it only because it's totally unnecessary or what? And what's wrong with providing Arabic links and references here on Wikipedia? I mean, there are lots of articles here on Wikipedia, besides ones regarding Jordanian footballers, that include Arabic links and references. The only reason why I like to provide Arabic links and references to articles of Jordanian footballers here on Wikipedia is because they are the only ones that back up the information of these footballers and make a lot of sense, and there are hardly any English ones out there that help back up the info. Trust me, the Arabic ones are much better because they contain much more, or better yet, all sources of the info I provide. So I provide these links and references as sources to back up the info I provide. And as for all the Facebook links I've been trying to provide for the past few months, which I have also just removed myself for the past few days after I found out why providing certain Facebook links is inappropriate here on Wikipedia, I thought it was completely fine to do that after I saw Lionel Messi's Facebook page provided as a link on an article of him here on Wikipedia, so I thought I could help by doing the same to articles of Jordanian footballers here on Wikipedia, and I thought it wouldn't matter, in fact I thought the same was allowed to be done for any article here on Wikipedia of a footballer. So if it's really the links and references you guys have a problem with, just remove them yourselves from now on without having to revert my recent edits, like manually. As for me, I promise to never ever do this again. I really didn't mean to cause you guys any trouble with all I've been doing, I just wanted to help because I enjoy doing this, and I've been doing all this because I'm the one who created most articles/pages here on Wikipedia of Jordanian footballers, national teams, and clubs and improved all others created by other people. You see, I used to be the only one here on Wikipedia who had access to all the information of Jordanian footballers and teams until I tried to help everyone else here on Wikipedia, like readers and members, giving them access to this information by providing it here on Wikipedia.

So as of for now and from now on, please accept and leave my recent edits and contributions that I have made for the past few days because they are all now totally accurate and I tried to make it easier for you guys by removing Facebook links and the | symbols from the references I've been providing. Will you guys please forgive me, not get me into anymore trouble and not try to stop me from contributing by blocking me. Please let's just forget about all this and allow me to continue contributing because I want to help, is that so wrong? :(

Thank you for your cooperation :)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Everyoneis1 (talkcontribs) 12:54, June 22, 2014‎ (UTC)

Sea of Trees (film)[edit]

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox2 and move it to Sea of Trees (film) - But please do it quick. Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 05:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Peer review[edit]

Hello B, I've given an article for peer review HERE, will you please tell me what to do next? --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 19:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

CSD question[edit]

I declined the CSD András Csáki not because I am sure it is not a copyright violation, but because I did some checking, and was unable to conclude it was unambiguous.

The Wikipedia article is not new, tracing back to 2007. The site with the similar wording has been around for years, but not sure how many.

If you saw something I missed, please point it out, but it looks to me like it needs more investigation. Perhaps Wikipedia:Copyright problems? (I've reviewed many at CP, but never set one up - and with CSD well over 100, that's my first priority.)--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

The Transporter Legacy[edit]

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox2 and move it to The Transporter Legacy - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 03:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Assassin, the ref given doesn't say filming is underway. You also copied the plot section word for word, it also doesn't make sense. Bgwhite (talk) 06:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
No, the REF says "Pic is in production" which means "underway", if the filming's not underway they would say "Pic is in pre-production." It's not pre, it's only production, so it makes sense. And about the plot, I've written it in my own wording, check it now. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 13:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
"Pic is in production" does not mean filming. You are assigning Wikipedia terminology to news articles. Need a ref to say it actually has started filming. Bgwhite (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Here is more:

Do the first and then this, thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Thandor: The Invasion[edit]

Hello! Why have you deleted these parts of text? I am going to continue translating article later. And these section stubs will be helpful to organize my work

{{Expand section|date=August 2014}}
{{Expand section|date=August 2014}}
{{Expand section|date=August 2014}}
{{Expand section|date=August 2014}}
And i think that this template will be helpful for that who want to expand article by translating.

P.S. i hope that it will be easier for you to read this than for me to write it :D Schulllz (talk) 13:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Schulllz, that does look painful for you to have written. I can understand an empty section or two, but five in a row gets to be too much. Next time, you can write any article in your sandbox or as a draft. Once "finished", you can then move it to article space. {{Expand language}} templates should never be in articles. Instead, use the {{Expand Russian}} template. Put it at the beginning of the article. Also give the Russian article's name. For example... {{Expand Russian|Церковь_(сооружение)|date=August 2014}}. Bgwhite (talk) 07:30, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for explanation about templates {{Expand language}} and {{Expand Russian}}! I haven't finished the whole article but wrote only the stub because i was afraid that my article will be deleted because of the lack of Wikipedia:Notability in it. And i can't understand your phrase "that does look painful for you to have written". Schulllz (talk) 17:26, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Schulllz, even if the article is deleted for whatever reason, a copy still does exist, so your work won't be lost. The "painful" comment was because of your "...easier for you to read this than for me to write it" comment. It looks "painful" or it does look like it was hard to write that up. Bgwhite (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Marshall the Miracle Dog and more[edit]

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox14 and move it to Marshall the Miracle Dog - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 10:29, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's another User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox3 to 6 Miranda Drive - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 18:31, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Israeli Cup 1963-64[edit]

Can you open this link Did he play in Israeli Cup 1963-64???? :) Why did you revert my edit?--Unikalinho (talk) 14:30, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Unikalinho, I need more info. What article did I revert your edit? The link you gave is about a composer and not an athlete. He died before 1963. Bgwhite (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I think Unikalinho is concerned about this edit where you reverted to a version that said Victor_Young played in the 1963–64 Israel State Cup. GB fan 20:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
GB Fan, yes, exactly. And Bgwhite surprises me even more. Let read carefully the version which he returned after my edits :)--Unikalinho (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
In the edit I reverted, Unikalinho left their signature. No signatures go in main articles. Bgwhite (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

GB Fan, what better to do: return my version 1963–64 Israel State Cup or leave what we have now?--Unikalinho (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

The best thing is to do neither of those two. The best thing to do is to correct the errors and not introduce others such as adding your signature to the article. GB fan 23:39, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I did so, but M-r Bgwhite recklessly reverted all this... One moment. In the old version it was that replay took place on the same day (12 September) as the main round. I don't know the exactly date, but it's obvious that here is the error. The signature was made to indicate this error, that someone else could fix it. I try to do otherwise :)--Unikalinho (talk) 03:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


I email Bob McAllan CEO at PMCM asking him about KVNV once it moves to Middletown, NJ here is his respond confirming the new call letters WJLK. I have no idea how to idea how to cite this.

Dan: We will have several exciting programming announcements for Channel 3 as we enter the Fall 14 season. Unfortunately, while the deals are in the handshake stage they have not yet been signed so we are not at liberty to make any announcements at this time.

We at KVNV (soon to be WJLP once the move is made-that announcement we can make) sincerely hope you enjoy the programming lineup and look forward to having you as a viewer. Please feel free to email me with your thoughts at any time.


DLA75 (talk) 06:42, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

DLA75, the problem I had with the edit wasn't the move. It was the addition of javascript and other unnecessary formatting to the article. It was very hard to see what to keep and what to delete. They way you solved the problem was the best route. Bgwhite (talk) 06:48, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-32[edit]

07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Ammy Virk[edit]

sir don't remove anything from Ammy Virk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabpedia (talkcontribs) 07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Punjabpedia, anybody can edit any page. Never tell anyone they cannot edit. You added material to an article that was linked to your user page. This is not allowed. Also, which person in the photo is Virk? Bgwhite (talk) 07:45, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

there are close friends and me too and and i something what you say and i hove not any solo picture of ammy so in four five day i'm add in this page solo picture and i know anybody can edit any page but sir don't remove this picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabpedia (talkcontribs) 07:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Virginia Peninsula[edit]

Hi Bgwhite. Behind every bot there is a human, right? So I can't see why they don't enable the "thank" feature for edits by bots. I can image that bots do so many small edits that it might be a problem getting flooded by hundreds of "thanks" messages. At any rate, as I am am concerned, thanks. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:56, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Author comments[edit]

Please stop removing comments from templates like {{cite web |author-<!--Staff writers; no by-line.--> ...}} They're added for a reason. In this case, namely to indicate that the author has already been researched and found to have been not named in the source, rather than being missing information in an incomplete citation. Every time you remove one of these, you are pointlessly wasting future editors' time, looking up the source again to see if the citation is incomplete or not.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  07:46, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

SMcCandlish <sarcasm> Yes, I'm removing those comments everyday.</sarcasm> Egads. Nothing more than I hate worse is people complaining about one mistake as if it happens all the time. It was broken and throwing off an error. How about fixing it and it won't be deleted again. Bgwhite (talk) 07:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
That's not what the error was, though. It was generated by "|author-" instead of "|author=". I have no idea what you're doing every day, since I'm not stalking your edits. >;-) You wouldn't be the first editor to be programmatically removing such comments, if you'd been doing that. Glad you weren't. I apologize if I came off as alarmist.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  08:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Wagon-wheel effect[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Wagon-wheel effect, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. (talk) 00:10, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

HTML on page "Jerk (physics)"[edit]

Hi, I'm totally new to this and experienced a revert from my experimental HTML to Wikimarkup, which changed my intentions of the structure of a list.

The story goes as follows: I started with Wikimarkup and failed to implement my targeted rendering. I visited the Teahouse and conversed with MadScientistX11, who pointed me to help:lists, where I found the remark, that Wikimarkup cannot do what I wanted to do, but supplied a pattern fitting my intentions. I was able to tranport this pattern into the edit of the jerk-page and it rendered fine to my perception. Because it was late :), I went to sleep with the page containing, I admit, ugly formatted HTML-code. When I came back today, I noticed, that the rendering does not fit anymore my intentions, and checked the history, which brought me here.

May I please ask, what I can do, to get my contribution into the shape I intend. Please, also let me know, what was the wrong in my doings, that attracted -I think- a bot to revise my text, and, finally, please let me assure, that I strongly intend to adhere to any Wikipedia rules and other rules belonging to social adequacy.

Final remark: I am not a native speaker in English, and my intentions are perfectly de rigeur. Please, help. Purgy (talk) 10:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Purgy Purgatorio, I saw this on my watchlist and my first thought was, "Who is calling me a Jerk?".  :)
A bot didn't revise the text, I did. All bots must have "bot" in their name.
One should use wikimarkup only as not everybody knows HTML markup. "Should" is key as there are some cases where one has to use HTML. Some wikimarkup has advantages over HTML. For example, wikimarkup for tables renders much faster than HTML
I was confused on what you were trying to do. I apologize for messing things up. Is everything back to your satisfaction? Bgwhite (talk) 21:23, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Bgwhite, Yes, for the moment the article looks fine to me as it is, thanks. My main concern however is the strategy I should/have to follow regarding the use of HTML. The current Wikimarkup implementation does its job in rendering OK, but, honestly, does not reflect the intended structure in its syntax, what HTML, although expressed in rude and unpolished formatting, did. I am a rather math oriented guy and generally prefer more elaborate structures to quick and dirty solutions (no offense to Wikimarkup, please!). I just noticed your last edit, improving on this reflection in the syntax, thanks.

Can you, please, tell me

  • what drew your attention to my HTML babble
  • if it was the unformatted, rude, copy and paste look of the tags, that made you intervening
  • if you, or also others, generally hunt for HTML
  • if there is some official guide about use vs non use of HTML

Please, take no hard feelings from my favour for lists and structures :) above, I truly respect your efforts to maintain a corporate look of Wikipedia. Sorry for estimating you being a bot! Being a newbie: Purgy (talk) 06:46, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Purgy Purgatorio, I didn't feel offended by the bot remark, so no apologizes needed. I'm a math/computer person, so I like structure and doing things right.
A program looks for some html tags and a few of us peons fix them.
Oi, I wish there was a an easy page to say what is ok and what isn't. Essentially, <a>, <b>, <i>, <table>, <ul>, <font>, <s> and header tags are off limits for various reasons. <ol> can be used when there is a break in the list and you want to continue with the number you left off. There is no wikicode equivalent. There are some "bugs" in Wikimedia that necessitates the use of <p> in some limited cases. Bgwhite (talk) 07:26, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────There's a "whitelist" (whose location I don't recall) which lists all the various HTML tags that the MediaWiki software allows to be used as straight HTML; anything not on that list is forbidden. This list includes all of the tags shown by Bgwhite as "off limits" except for <a>...</a>; also excluded from the whitelist is <img />. Tags like <b>, <i>, etc. are whitelisted, therefore permitted; but these are discouraged, because there are ways of doing the same thing in Wikimarkup. Sometimes it is necessary to use HTML because the desired effect is not possible in Wikimarkup. For example, starting a numeric list at a point other than 1 may be achieved thus:
#<li value=4>Fourth item
#Fifth item
renders as
  1. Fourth item
  2. Fifth item

Embedding one list in another list is possible in pure WikiMarkup, but only if the inner list is positioned at the end of an entry in the outer list:

  • Outer list, first item
    1. Inner list, first item
    2. Inner list, second item (this is still the first item of the outer list)
  • Outer list, second item
When it is desirable to embed a sublist within an item of the outer list, with text after that sublist, you need to use some HTML:
*Outer list, first item <ol><li>Inner list, first item <li>Inner list, second item (this is still the first item of the outer list)</ol> Outer list, first item continued
*Outer list, second item
renders as
  • Outer list, first item
    1. Inner list, first item
    2. Inner list, second item (this is still the first item of the outer list)
    Outer list, first item continued
  • Outer list, second item

but even in these cases, the pure HTML should be kept to a minimum. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Ooops, while prepearing and saving my comment below, I missed the thorough info of Redrose64. Sorry, I take some time to digest, but the depth seems to be my linking. Thank you. Purgy (talk) 14:02, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Bgwhite, I see. So I have to conclude, that even this,

<ul> <li>The ...</li> <li>High-powered ....</li> <li>Emergency ....</li> <li>A ... <ol> <li>apply ...</li> <li>apply ...</li> </ol> The ....</li> </ul>

rendering like this and reflecting exactly my intentions, would not find mercy:

  • The ...
  • High-powered ....
  • Emergency ....
  • A ...
    1. apply ...
    2. apply ...
    The ....

(Please, have alook at the source) Regards, and thanks, Purgy (talk) 13:54, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, all! After reading and hopefully understanding the info provided by Redrose64, think I belong to the category, which should be kept to a minimum. :) Am I correct with my assumption? Purgy (talk) 14:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Purgy I think it better as use wikicode unless it can't be done by wikicode, but then only use HTML if necessary. While Redrose64 is correct from a technical point of view, as I said earlier, there are various reasons why not use some tags. For example, <b>, <i> and <s> shouldn't be used for accessibility reasons. Also have to remember that other people will edit the page. Doing something complex or out of the ordinary makes it hard for other people to edit. But then again, math articles are usually complex and out of the ordinary to begin with. When I have some technical question, asking Redrose64 is usually my first person to ask. He is a great resource
Shame Redrose64, you started off with #<li value=4>Fourth item. You forgot the use of <ol> first. I mentioned this as ok in my previous text, but it wan't as elegantly said as what you wrote. I think that is first time you weren't technically correct in 2-3 years. I should mark the moment. :)
The whitelist is here. A developer emailed me the list a few weeks back and I still have the email. Otherwise I wouldn't remember where it was at.
The omission of <ol> in my first example was deliberate: if you use
#<li value=4>Fourth item
#Fifth item
you get an extra-wide left margin, because MediaWiki emits a double list which HTMLTidy attempts to optimise. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:51, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bgwhite, please, assume that I am much more theoretically interested in the possibilities, than in a daily experience on HTML. Just funny, that I already again, really unintentionally!, arranged a collision with Wikimarkup and Html in a discussion in the teahouse on embedding pure italics in bold+italics. The only solution I got was, you gess it, HTML with <b>, <i>. My naive intention originally was just to format a discussion title in atractive way. I am used to this, however, I have that anti-Midas-touch, wherever I put my innocent hands on turns to ... not to gold. :D Thanks for the link. Purgy (talk) 15:39, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 7 August[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Deleting my Pics[edit]

Hello Bgwhite

I put some Pics with creative versions of light painting on the page. Please tell me the reason for deleting.


--Foto-dus (talk) 06:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Foto-dus. Please tell me the article. Bgwhite (talk) 06:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

These Photograps are my own work following the rules of Light paintin. I would like to schow the reader what possibilities you can realise.


--Foto-dus (talk) 07:06, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Foto-dus Please tell me the article. I haven't a clue on what article you are talking about. I edit hundreds a day. I can do nothing without the name of the article. Bgwhite (talk) 07:13, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Here the link:

--Foto-dus (talk) 07:18, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

  1. You left a message at the bottom of the article. Talk messages belong on the talk pages and not inside articles.
  2. You added new images to an already full gallery. Per WP:Gallery, "Wikipedia is not an image repository. A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the above paragraph or moved to Wikimedia Commons."
  3. There are currently 161 images in Category:Light painting. Not all can go into the article. Granted, not all the images are anywhere near high quality. (What's up with the naked women?). So why add yours and not others?
I read the article carefully and read some other sites on-line. I do think your Hubertus-Chapel and LED-Flashligts photos should be in the article. They would be the only photos that describe the light Painting technique. Your Bridge photo describes the Light Drawing technique and the vast majority of the photos in the article are of this technique. I'll move the Hubertus-Chapel photo up into the article. I'll add LED-Flashligts into the gallery. Bgwhite (talk) 07:54, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-33[edit]

07:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


People in glass houses? Both of us appear to have made edits that were only partly correct. JMiall 08:23, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

JMiall You said everything in my edit was wrong. This is a blind revert. I reverted again, but didn't make the same table mistake. People do make mistakes while editing... you adding the {{{ and me changing a colon are mistakes... that is editing not clicking the "undo" button. Just blindly reverting everything is not kosher. When doing an insult, atleast do a correct insult. :) Of course I was just called out for doing "nostbomtic critism and sense censure"... I told them not to write here because they don't know English, but they don't understand me telling them that. sigh. Bgwhite (talk) 08:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The varna sock[edit]

Any chance that you might reconsider your indef of the master account? Blocking the alternate account is fine and, yes, the master has been a damn nuisance. But they're pretty new and basically just getting wound up about IDHT stuff. They do seem have a learned one or two things, per their usertalk page discussion with NeilN. Maybe drop it to a week with a warning about future conduct? Or perhaps even rescind it now if they promise to behave ... but with a warning that it will be indef if they misbehave (ie: war, sock) again? Remarkably, for someone who is quite het up at the moment, they've not called me a f'in dog, accused me of "malicious mischief" etc, so there is some hope. - Sitush (talk) 20:44, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

As usual, you make a great argument. I've left a small follow-up on their talk page. Tell me if I should modify it. Bgwhite (talk) 21:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm assuming that you've set up a reminder of some sort (me, it would be an old-fashioned paper diary entry but I'm a Luddite at heart). If not, then do you need to change the block settings so that they automatically expire? - Sitush (talk) 23:37, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The Bosnian issue[edit]

I've got dragged into the Bosnian CIR issue but it looks like we might be making some progress, albeit I'll have to keep an eye on the deleted article that I recreated for them. At some point, I'm going to have to explain to them that they don't need to start a new section every time they comment on my talk page! - Sitush (talk) 16:59, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Spectral and a Christmas Eve project[edit]

Please take a look at following sandboxes and move them.

Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 18:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Will you please do this quickly? --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 10:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Still waiting...! --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 04:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Assassin, you are getting worse than my wife. :) I moved the first one, but not the second. Need to get a name for that. Especially when it is also mentioned as Untitled Christmas project, Christmas Eve-set and "Untitled XMas movie" in the press. Bgwhite (talk) 06:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
No title is confirmed by the studio yet, just move it, there are many film articles existed on Wikipedia with the "Untitled" mention in their titles. Untitled Fantastic Four reboot, Untitled Woody Allen project, Untitled John Wells project, are just a few examples. Currently the film project is known as "Untitled Christmas Eve project", Google it. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 07:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Assassin, ok, you have proven articles can have "Untitled". I moved it. Bgwhite (talk) 17:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

No personal attacks & assume good faith[edit]

Your revert at Who We Are (Red song) stated that the editor lied and that the editor had no sources. That is first and foremost a personal attack. Second, it goes against WP:AGF, which you request editors to do when commenting here. The chart is real. There was copy in other locations that the song charted. Feel free to discuss but don't edit war over this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:03, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz They have created over 10 articles in which there is no evidence the song has ever charted. They have created articles in which the chart they mentioned did not exist when the song charted. At this point they have lied and they continue to lie. It is not an attack, it is a statement of fact. I do not trust anything they add unless it is proven by a valid reference. They are adding AfD messages to their own articles, to articles in which they have recently created and to random article. They continue to recreate articles deleted at AfD. They have vandalized articles that they did not create. They do not add references. This isn't about an edit war, this is about an incompetent, vandalizing editor. Bgwhite (talk) 05:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Headlamp (outdoor). Your edits have been reverted or removed.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing.

This has been discussed on the talk page and there is no evidence of any attempt at discussion from yourself. Your claim that the precise citation request is 'not anywhere in MOS' is also incorrect. As stated on the talk page, WP:VERIFY demands, "cite the source clearly and precisely (specifying page ...) - My emphasis). It would therefore seem that the editors in question are perfectly entitled to demand more precise citations.

I should also point out that you are currently at 3RR. Though not within 24 hours, it is still a slow motion edit war and you appear to be the only one warring (editing against consensus). I B Wright (talk) 11:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Paicines, CA[edit]

Good Afternoon BGWhite,

It seems that we have reached a point of the 3RR rule.

All my edits have a cite and/or reference from another wiki page.

Please help me understand your objections to the following changes:

an unnamed Reservoir (your claim)

Paicines Reservoir, cites from Paicines Ranch website and county documents and plaque at site.

Your removal of a famous person

Tiburcio Vasquez (bandit)

cite from Wikipedia

In 1873 he gained statewide, and then nationwide, notoriety. Vásquez and his gang stole $2,200 from Snyder's Store in Tres Pinos, now called Paicines, in San Benito County, killing three innocent bystanders in the process.

The current owner is Sallie Calhoun, county records.

--Our Farms 21:28, 14 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe.nehls (talkcontribs)

Please look at the article's talk page. The discussion should be there and I moved it there. Also, please type ~~~~ after you post a message.

"Jerk (physics)" was edited by BG19bot and IP-address[edit]

Hi, in no way I object to my contributions being edited, be it personally, be it by a bot, and I certainly try to learn for the future, e.g. to sensibly insert non breaking blanks or omitting underscores in wiki links. For the former, I feel quite secure, but for the latter, I'd certainly like to have some resource to look up, when, and why and under what circumstances this is to do. Lately, no questions of mine have been responded to in the teahouse and I really feel a bit lost how to achieve a solid picture of the desired Wikipedia layout: TeX does not render satisfactorily, special characters look thin and inconsistent, how to find out the differences of <math></math>,{{math|}}, and so on. Looking at the various offered "guides to beginners" is boring and successfully hides the relevant parts of information to me.

Sorry for complaining, just a plain question: May I ask you for a recommendation where to look to improve my editing skills and make them compatible to Wikipedia needs? Or is there just that steep learning curve?

Returning back to the bot-edit: There arose one layout problem which resulted from removing empty lines. I placed two thumbnails immediately after a 2. heading, however they were longer than the text of the whole section, so I inserted these empty lines in the section, knowing that this is near to using HTML tags ;) . After their removal the pics now affect the layout of the following 2.heading, which I dislike.

What to do, where to look, ..., please? Purgy (talk) 09:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Article referencing at Headlamp (outdoor)[edit]

Thank you for your interest in the referencing at the above article. It might be better if you left it alone for the time being because there is a much larger issue at stake here. There is a major problem with the referencing as it currently stands. The reference was added by an established tendentious editor (Wtshymanski) who edits Wikipedia to his own lowly standards. He will rarely follow policy or any advice given to him. Whether this is laziness or just bloody mindedness is open to debate (and has been at considerable length). He also makes frequent efforts to edit in completely false information claiming it to be referenced by some pre-existing reference. When anyone produces a reference to dispute the claim, then the reference however impeccable is wrong.

His main technique is to provide a single and vague reference at the end of a whole paragraph or even article section (and even a whole article in the past) maintaining that this reference covers all the claims in the entire paragraph or section (or article) including anything that he may care to add in the future. In the current situation, the vague Swart reference is intended to cover the entire section. It was also intended to cover the recent, otherwise unreferenced additions made recently (and removed). This gives the situation that others have no real idea what really is referenced and what is not. Wikipedia demands "precise references" for every claim made as many have noted and this article deserves nothing less.

There are major question marks with the claims in the article section being referenced as some are dubious (and I note that another editor has removed quite a few of them). The first sentence of the section is questionable, "Headlamps are usually powered by three or four AA or AAA batteries". This is untrue. Headlamps are often powered by C or D size batteries; li-ion batteries and even lead-acid or nickel-iron/cadmium. But the reference is intended to cover these claims.

The issue of the standard of referencing has already been taken to the edit warring notice board and Wtshymanski was specificaly warned not to continue the edit war or he would be blocked from editing. It seems to me: that the IP editor has added those {{full}} tags as an invitation to reference the section fully and precisely (i.e. properly). While I agree with his intent, I believe he is wasting the effort as Wtshymanski will never discuss his editing or admit when he is wrong. Based on past performance, he is likely to leave the article well alone until the heat dies down.

I would suggest leaving the tags for now to keep everyone happy, but I concur that as they are unlikely to serve any real purpose, they could be removed sometime in the future on the grounds that they are stale. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 12:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 17 August[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-34[edit]

07:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Knock, Knock (2015 film)[edit]

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox1 and move it to Knock, Knock (2015 film) - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Assassin, there is material in the production section that should be in a plot section. Bgwhite (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 18 August[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: User:Praveen Dalal[edit]

Hello Bgwhite. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of User:Praveen Dalal, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Decline speedy del;ete per Wikipedia:Editors matter. Thank you. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 05:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Eastmain, editors that advertise and promote themselves on Wikipedia don't matter. They keep putting themselves, their user page and their law firm into articles on India law. Their user page has their work email, work link to website and the services they provide. Bgwhite (talk) 05:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello Bgwhite and Eastmain. Thanks for spending your time and efforts upon my user page and this issue. I have taken note of this issue and would do my level best to resolve the issue. The page was created when I joined this wonderful community. Obviously, a beginner is a novice and it takes time to understand the details of a platform like Wikipedia. I am still a beginner but am willing to learn and adapt. Hope this resolves the issue. Any suggestions are welcome.

--Praveen Dalal (talk) 05:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Praveen Dalal, you haven't edited since 2007 under your username. You have been editing as an IP. Please stop putting your name, your law firm and your user page into articles. This is purely promotional and you have only been promoting yourself and your law firm. Eastmain has a philosophical abhorrence to speedy deletes and didn't follow the rules. Please change your userpage to remove your law firm and the services the firm provides or it will be deleted. Bgwhite (talk) 06:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Bgwhite I have not done editing since 2012 when I change my qualifications details. I have also removed the services part and some other details to make the profile more acceptable. Nevertheless what I do and where I work are essential part of my profile and they have to be retained. I would try to update my profile gradually after analysing the policies of Wikipedia. Thanks for your suggestions and efforts and I hope this matter is resolved now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praveen Dalal (talkcontribs) 06:33, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

List of Mi corazón es tuyo episodes[edit]

Hi, I've seen you've removed the colors that were on the list of episodes at least could give me a good explanation for that?, I say this because I do not understand your reasons for having removed the colors. Greetings.--Damián (talk) 06:23, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Damián80, it was a big, giant, bright, red block. It was blaring and it hurt to look at. Use a color that isn't so distracting, a pastel color maybe. Bgwhite (talk) 06:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Mmm, that weird to me does not bother me, but anyway, try to do it, thanks for your reply.--Damián (talk) 07:23, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 19 August[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Michael (2015 film)[edit]

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox3 and move it to Michael (2015 film) - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Cima Brenta[edit]

I am curious to know what was wrong with this edit. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Alan_Liefting Sorry about that, my fault. I pressed revert instead of undo. There should be no content between TOC and first headline per WP:TOC and WP:LEAD. This is an accessibility issue for users of screen readers. Bgwhite (talk) 05:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


Just a note that I am still working on the abalone article and have been consistently since the "work in progress" went up. Thanks speednat (talk) 06:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Speednat, it doesn't belong in the middle of the article, which got me confused. It goes at the beginning. Bgwhite (talk) 06:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I know it seems like whenever we talk we never agree :), but it distinctly states section or article. Thank speednat (talk) 09:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)