User talk:Erpert

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

Kelly Shibari[edit]

Hello, Erpert. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.Geniac (talk) 16:11, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the email. I noticed that the link doesn't actually state her exact date of birth (I've only seen it listed on other wikis), so I'm leaving it out. But the other sources give me a lot to work with. Face-smile.svg Erpert blah, blah, blah... 18:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
D'oh! Just saw the other sources. Thanks again. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 19:03, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

{{Proposed deletion/dated

The words: suggests, seems like etc. were inadvertently used in the article. The article is fully referenced and the necessary editing has been done. Will be really happy to do further editing as deemed appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed99999 (talkcontribs) 01:35, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015[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 User:KTMUSIC1 and article Kimberly Thompson. Thank you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I think the ANI thread can probably be closed now. I believe you created the article and wrote it to a good standard in absolute good faith, and there's no way you could have predicted this drama. However, just because all information on Wikipedia must be cited to a reliable source, it doesn't follow that all information cited to a reliable source must be in Wikipedia! Normally, I wouldn't have touched the article, but having met people who have add articles on Wikipedia without any involvement at their end, the behaviour of someone who is only on Wikipedia under duress (as the article's subject appears) can be unpredictable. They seemed to have calmed down a bit with the announcement of the AfD, and OTRS is now involved, so hopefully things will sort themselves out. We can always get back to your version in the long term. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I did create the article in good faith, but considering that I am the creator, it wouldn't be proper for me to close the thread, imo. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 19:36, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Third Opinion[edit]

3O re Talk:Matthew VanDyke#Criticism of Van Dyke[edit]

  • Hello Erpert - apologies if I've missed something, but I do not think my 3O request has been addressed? You deleted the request from the 3O page but nobody has given a 3O as far as I can see. Grateful for your comments. - Slugfilm (talk) 05:34, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
    • It was addressed right here. Given that, I think WP:BLPN would be a better venue for this issue (I personally have no opinion on it). Erpert blah, blah, blah... 07:39, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Thank you for explaining Erpert. I hadn't realised a Third Opinion didn't actually need to be labelled as such. I will pursue the discussion on WP:BLPN as you suggest. - Slugfilm (talk) 07:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

3O re Talk:Scott_Walker_(politician)#Third_opinion[edit]

Thank you Erpert for getting involved. Have another question for you (at ),
namely, should this sentence ...

(On March 9, 2015, Walker signed legislation making Wisconsin a right to work state.[69])

... be added at the end of the paragraph so casual users know how the incident was resolved. --BoogaLouie (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Undiscussed moves[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

  • Please stop moving (pornographic actress) to (actress) without discussion, the stable title should be held, if you wish to use a RM then use a RM, thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:31, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
    • They were discussed, as I clearly explained here. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 19:12, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
      • (talk page stalker) For that matter, why are you moving them back before discussion can start? WP:CONCISE and WP:QUALIFIER seem fairly explanatory. Neither of them provide for your interpretation that the parenthesis must include the word "pornographic" along with "actress" as you have been doing. The latter actually specifies "to limit the tag to a single, recognizable and highly applicable term". --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 02:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
        • Thanks for the support, Scalhotrod, but let's continue this at the discussion that I linked to above. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 02:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
          • Hey, I voted early on. I just happened to run across the variety of moves this User has done which lead me here. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 02:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
            • Because of guidelines about article stability and project local consensus. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
              • As I have clearly stated several times, this "local consensus" that you speak of is not going in your favor. I'm closing this so the discussion can be finished at the above talk page like I requested. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 07:51, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fair Stone Draft: Your third opinion[edit]

Hello Erpert,

thanks for your opinion! Could you give me some pointers as to what sections or which phrase and wordings sound like marketing blah blah? I know the standard and the association behind it and would like to make the article as neutral and objective as possible. I removed the whole adulation phase about WiN=WiN and other minor details.

Greetings from Germany! FairStoneLabel (talk) 08:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Before you do anything else, I suggest you file a change of username request at WP:RENAME, because your username right now sounds like you are editing for your company, which violates the username policy. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 09:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)



  • Done :) Would you mind having another look just in case I missed any biased phrases? Either way, thanks for you advices. Will resubmit the article till friday. Azradon (talk) 07:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
    • I have responded on the draft's talk page. Have a good day. Face-smile.svg Erpert blah, blah, blah... 00:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)