User talk:Doniago

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


Thank you, Don and I think I resolved it with your helpful suggestions !![edit]

Thank you, Don for being patient and helpful in your kind suggestions - I went back and reviewed my research - I emailed the director of the music video who confirmed each of Slipknot's bandmembers' character portrayal of the respective characters in the film The Shining - I also added the correct date as to when the source was published (which I forgot to do first time sorry). It now reads with more clarity. The musical artist did receive a Grammy nomination for their video work. Thank you again for taking the time to being willing to politely and professionally educate those of us who are trying hard to work within the guidelines and add to the awesomeness that is Wiki !!! Cheers and happy weekend, Steve

96.249.205.46[edit]

Hi. You wrote on User talk:96.249.205.46 that their edit contained original research. I believe you must have misread the edit, as "critical acclaim" is just another (nicer even?) way of writing "highly positive reviews", and doesn't actually change the essence of the article. The article in question (The Sixth Sense) would be better to not contain either phrase, and simply let the facts speak for themselves. —WOFall (talk) 03:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Actually, this has been discussed at WT:FILM and the consensus at the time was that a statement such as "critical acclaim" is a stronger assertion than "highly positive reviews", and as such it should be sourced if it's going to be used. Highly positive reviews can be substantiated via Rotten Tomatoes or such; critical acclaim implies a higher degree of reception. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 03:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
That's surprising, but so long as there's no misunderstandings. Thanks. —WOFall (talk) 13:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
No problem! If it's a concern for you, you're welcome to discuss it at WT:FILM. DonIago (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:MMFF[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:MMFF. 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. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
92 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Deep Space Nine (space station) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
301 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Star Trek: The Animated Series (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
387 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Mammoth Cave National Park (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
94 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Bon Secours Sisters (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
15 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Archon II: Adept (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
581 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Vulcan (Star Trek) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
125 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start XDA Developers (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
84 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Frankenstein in popular culture (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
1,107 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Home Improvement (TV series) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
61 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Blitz: The League II (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
55 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Jeri Taylor (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
314 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Christopher Pike (Star Trek) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
381 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start Vibranium (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
3,016 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA Uzbekistan (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Unencyclopaedic
315 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Big Thunder Mountain Railroad (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
68 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Aeroscraft (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
18 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub PowerPlay (technology) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
171 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Old San Juan, Puerto Rico (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
177 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Allan Hyde (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
10 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub Philip Coolidge (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
155 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Fantasmic! (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
35 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub BeamNG.drive (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
7 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub Samsung Galaxy Core Advance (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
1 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub André Conde (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
37 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Brain Dead (film) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
6 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Plotting (video game) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
106 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Builders of the Future (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
22 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Happy (Ashanti song) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
238 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Fever (The Black Keys song) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
3 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Édouard Ferrand (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub

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) 00:20, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello - RE: The 'Anthony Rapp' page edit[edit]

Hi Doniago,
Thanks for explaining to me the issue about adding comments/explanation when editing a wiki page, I'm new to wiki editing so I appreciate the info. About the edit I made on Anthony Rapp's page, I changed the section saying he was "one of the first openly gay men on broadway" to "one of the first openly queer men" due to him identifying as specifically queer rather than gay in the interview posted beneath that. I also checked the citations next to the "openly gay" part and saw that there was no mention of him stating he was gay, rather the writers of said articles mislabeling him as such.
I just checked his page and saw the clarification edited, I think that looks a lot better than the previous sentence just saying he was openly gay, so thank you for the edit. I would like to just change the part where it says "others have called him" to "others have mislabeled him as..." since it seems like a more accurate description.

Fair enough. As long as the information in the article matches what's said in the sources I'm happy. Thanks for getting in touch! DonIago (talk) 12:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

re The_Farnsworth_Parabox[edit]

The The_Farnsworth_Parabox page has conflicting information. The summary on the right lists the episode as being Season four, Episode 10. The main article says that it is the "fifteenth episode of the fourth production season". The main article is correct and the summary should be updated to say Season 4, Episode 15.

Fixed Looks good to me now; please let me (or ideally the article's Talk page) know if you spot any other problems, and thanks for bringing this to my attention! Also, please note that new Talk page threads should generally be placed at the bottom of the page. Thanks again! DonIago (talk) 22:01, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

In popular culture items[edit]

Your understanding of community consensus is incorrect. Popcult items which are straightforeward description are sourced by the media item (book, film, etc.) which they refer to. Only those items which stray into analysis or interpretation need to be sourced. PLease do not continue to edit war over an incorrect understand of what is a non-mandatory guideline and not a policy. BMK (talk) 21:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it seems to me that if you ignore the bold, revert, discuss process then you're the one edit-warring...it also seems to me it would be best to get a consensus rather than lecturing me about whether my interpretation is correct. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 22:04, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Please note that I didn't "lecture" you until your second revert of a legitimate -- i.e. not a "Bold" -- edit. BMK (talk) 22:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
To clarify, those items were all in the Hudson Heights, Manhattan article, and have been for a long time. I moved them to Fort Tryon Park and The Cloisters because Hudson Heights was not the proper article for them, so there was no boldness involved, just simple editing. BMK (talk) 22:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
The context helps, and thank you for providing that, but I still don't agree with your view on adding pop culture items without secondary sourcing (barring certain minimalist statements, but I think we can both agree that's not what these are). I think it would be best if we wait for additional editors to offer their perspective. DonIago (talk) 12:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Oathkeeper. Yet again.[edit]

How long are we supposed to put up with Darkfrog24 continually edit-warring her preferred version of the Writing section into the article? She goes to talk, sure, but clearly doesn't listen to anyone there. No less than three editors, two admins, a DRN and an RfC have told here in no uncertain terms that she cannot do precisely what she is doing. You noted that you were approaching your zero tolerance point; I've reached it. We talk and talk to her on the discussion page, and she essentially tells us we are all stupid, reiterates how she is right and everyone else is wrong, and then does whatever she wants. She wants that chapter material in, and doesn't care what sort of crap sources she shoves in there to fulfill a requirement she herself has stated she doesn't believe in.
It's time something was done, since the article is going nowhere this way. She is the sort of contributor who chases editors away from articles, from collaboration and from Wikipedia itself. Please do something. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

So, no intent to do anything? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I must have missed your original message; sorry about that. I'm not an admin, but I guess my suggestions would be that you speak with either the individual who closed the RfC or the admin who blocked you both; either one of them is in a position of greater authority to work on the problem than I am. If you feel Darkfrog is edit-warring you could always try WP:ANEW but I don't know how well that would turn out. You could also try ANI again, but if you do your best chances are to focus on conduct issues and make sure you provide specific diffs. DonIago (talk) 18:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
221 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start Sideloading (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
71 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA The Righteous & the Butterfly (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
49 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start Superstar (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
19 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Electronic Frontiers Australia (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
644 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Andrew Wilson (actor) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
461 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: Start Powerman 5000 (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
83 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start The Gift (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
1,500 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Joe DiMaggio (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cleanup
819 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: B Kryptonite (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cleanup
142 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: A Wraith (Stargate) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Expand
600 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Foodfight! (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 2.0 Expand
139 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Times Square – 42nd Street / Port Authority Bus Terminal (New York City Subway) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
38 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub Potential (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
136 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Scooby Gang (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
88 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start Slumlord (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
1,202 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Lex Luthor (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Merge
97 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Comics vocabulary (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
258 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Google Maps (application) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
99 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Wax Fang (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 2.0 Wikify
107 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start What Animated Women Want (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
156 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: Start Mirror Universe (Star Trek) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
3 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Atlético Andalucía CF (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
2 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Abdelghani Bousta (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
3 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start Amunzi (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
43 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub The Way of the Warrior (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
46 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub Wave Broadband (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
12 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Amateur Girlfriends Go Proskirt Agents (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
16 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wrath of the Darkhul King (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
26 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Sacrifice (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
3 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Visitors (Buffy novel) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub

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) 23:36, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Zeitgeist Movement[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Zeitgeist Movement. 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. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

The Corbomite Manuever[edit]

re: The corbomite maneuver & ron howard playing Balok during the roast of william shatner. you want a source? I watched it on TV, so ultimately the source is me. Is a youtube clip good enough as a source? The problem with putting youtube clips in as sources is sometimes the publicity gets the clips taken down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.71.53 (talk) 22:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I've seen YouTube clips used as references, but you'd have to make sure it's not a copyright violation. Other than that, any reliable source would do...but unfortunately Wikipedia editors aren't reliable sources. DonIago (talk) 23:11, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank You for the Paradoxical Beer![edit]

I really did enjoy discussing time travel stories with you, but then I guess you got busy, because a couple of my notes to you seem to have vanished.

I am very honored, sir or madam, that you took the time to send me a beer - which I am enjoying right now, cheers! - and I apologize that I was not more timely in responding with gratitude.

Please consider me a gal who is always ready to talk about time travel stories. I hope that everything is going well with you and, again, I thank you very much.

OcelotHod (talk) 04:51, 17 July 2014 (UTC) OcelotHod

Thanks! Sorry if I missed replying to one or more messages... I was out of town for a few days (and I avoid Wikipedia on weekends), so it's entirely possible that something slipped past me! :(
Anywho, I'm happy to talk about time travel...just saw Edge of Tomorrow which I thought was improbably funny given the overall thrust of the film, but had a disappointing ending...though no specific subjects are coming to mind right now.
Hope you're doing well, and thanks again for getting in touch and for your kind words! Happy editing! DonIago (talk) 12:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

3RR complaint filed against Darkfrog24[edit]

I thought you might want to know where the complaint is, as you are involved. I got tired of waiting for her to get it, but she doesn't simply thinks we are all wrong, and that's enough to edit-war. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 07:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

She was blocked for a week. If you wish, we can begin working on the article in detail later on this afternoon. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 14:50, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Honestly, I have no interest in anything GoT-related, and if not for the DRN filing I never would have gotten involved in this bondoggle. I'm happy to offer opinions regarding how editing the article should go, and I'm certainly willing to tell editors when I don't think they're behaving themselves, but I'm not really that interested in directly editing the article myself, especially given my unfamiliarity with the subject matter. That said, if it's a matter of pulling unsourced material or trimming a plot summary for wordiness, let me know. Alternately if you want to talk about your concerns on the Talk page, I'll be keeping an eye on that and chiming in if there's something I think I can handle. Sorry if that's not the answer you were hoping for, but I do hope DF will edit more collaboratively upon their return. DonIago (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
I look forward to working on those bits in the article you find interesting. Do you think the plot summaries should remain separated by location, or would it be better to combine them all together in a single summary? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
You're still talking to someone who knows nothing about the series. :p I'd use what's been done for other episodes as a precedent. DonIago (talk) 16:47, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

BTW, with regards to the block, my advice would be to make every effort not to say anything unless you feel it's absolutely imperative that you do so. I know the temptation to engage is significant, but I don't think it ultimately helps anything, and even the perception that you two are going at it again will likely do nothing but damage your own credibility if and when there's another issue. Even if DF's unblock request is granted, that may not mean they'll return to their prior behaviors, and if they do then they've obviously already further damaged their own credibility. Personally I'd like to think after this most recent episode they'll come to understand that in highly controversial situations it's not enough to keep trying to push for the same material without a clear consensus...but we'll see. DonIago (talk) 13:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Crap, I saw this after posting a response in DF's talk. I responded to her inquiries there, so I don't see any further need to post to her. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
I think I skimmed your response earlier and it seemed fairly reasonable, but yeah, I'd avoid contact unless/until she approaches the OK Talk page in a more reasonable manner. If she doesn't then she's probably just digging her hole deeper, and if it becomes another DRN situation or what-not then that'll be a different story. DonIago (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm starting to be a little amused by the way DF can't make a post about this whole thing without then modifying it multiple times. That's probably not very nice of me, but I think everyone knows I'm beyond fed up with the way the whole Oathkeeper thing proceeded. DonIago (talk) 00:12, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I wish you hadn't replied to Darkfrog on their talk page; that's exactly the kind of engagement that I think isn't helpful; let the admins handle it. I'd recommend striking or removing your comment rather than presenting the appearance that you're going to continue confronting them (even if you believe you're being helpful at the time). As I said, I think the best thing you can do is avoid engaging except when absolutely necessary. DonIago (talk) 07:17, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Pinch Compromise[edit]

Undoing the link to the wrong term. If you insist of using a slang term for the device I suggest you fix the link to the correct term,. I suggest you modify the title of the article z-pinch to be "Pinch" (device) and then recreate the link from the article to point to it. This should have been addressed when someone created the article to begin with but someone got lazy when the wrote it. They should have known something was wrong when the couldn't find the term pinch.

And yes since you asked, Yes if you want a reliable source.. I am an actual plasma physicist at Caltech, if you'd like I can post about 1000 articles to you personal webpage to substantiate my claim. Put here's five just to make you happy (Use Ebsco to look up the articles if that will help..I included the link under the first article):

  • Fast Z - Pinch Study in Russia and Related Problems. Grabovskii, E. V. // AIP Conference Proceedings;2002, Vol. 651 Issue 1, p3

http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/8687397/history-z-pinch-research-u-s

  • Plasma current sustained by fusion charged particles in a field-reversed configuration. Berk, H. L.; Momota, H.; Tajima, T. // Physics of Fluids (00319171);Nov87, Vol. 30 Issue 11, p3548
  • Advances in the national inertial fusion program of China. X. T. He; W. Y. Zhang // EPJ Web of Conferences;2013, Issue 59, p1
  • Effect of preliminary low-energy laser irradiation on the melting of aluminum alloys. Kikin, P.; Perevezentsev, V.; Rusin, E.; Razov, E. // Technical Physics;Feb2012, Vol. 57 Issue 2, p203
  • Effect of radiation scattering on the melting and solidification of a flat layer of a translucent medium. Rubtsov, N. A.; Savvinova, N. A. // Journal of Applied Mechanics & Technical Physics;Nov/Dec2001, Vol. 42 Issue 6, p1007
As far as modifying the title of an article, you're welcome to raise that matter at the article's Talk page. I know next to nothing about electricity and/or plasma physics and consequently am not in a position to have an opinion on the matter.
Because Ocean's 11 is a film, we cannot assume that technologies presented in it are necessarily intended to reflect specific real-world tech. To avoid synthesis we would need a source that specifically mentions the film. Otherwise to refer to anything other than what's brought up in the film itself would be original research. In other words, we should use the terminology presented by the film unless we have compelling reasons to do otherwise.
That said, as I mentioned, if other editors support your changes then I have no problems abiding by consensus.
Lastly, please note that when posting to Talk pages you should add 4 tildes (~) to the end of your posts as a signature. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 12:36, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


Fixed the hyperlink to go to the right article. Still uses the term "pinch" as a slang term, but it redirects to z-pinch, which if you notice has a nice picture of what you are visualizing. The Z-pinch article has also been modified to mention the slang term.
Please note that by Wikipedia rules if you do not know about the technology being referred to...that clinically an admin can charge you for both vandalism of an article as well as ownership of an article
They really can't, and I'm betting you can't back that up with a link to the relevant policy. DonIago (talk) 02:41, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Actually they can the policy is posted regarding vandalism...on the good note they cant penalize you for an occasional misunderstanding like here....you admitted you were unfamiliar at the time and were willing to work a compromise which you appear to be okay with the final modification.....you do have an occasional admin that will "drill" you for it but that can be fixed by usually going to another admin and having that admin do an arbitration.
With all due respect, if I'm interpreting your statements about policy correctly, they are not consistent with my understanding of policy. Given that it seems likely I've been editing here much longer than you have, you'll have to forgive me if I take your claims with a bit of salt. DonIago (talk) 03:21, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Actually you haven't been editing longer, I'm just being to lazy to log into my admin account, over something this stupid. But since you insist your right I'm going to request a review of your other articles you've edited to see what you've been modifying.
(laughs) Okie-doke. Knock yourself out. DonIago (talk) 03:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)