User talk:Massyparcer

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

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Massyparcer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

List numbering[edit]

Thank you for adding Busan International Finance Center to the List of tallest buildings in the world. Please note that you also need to renumber the list below #108 to account for adding one to the list. Astronaut (talk) 11:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Median HH income page[edit]

Hi I need some help with the median household income page. You are right, the Gallup data does not have a direct source, and in addition can only be accessed by subscription. Also, I found some of the figures to be totally wrong. Anyway, the OECD data can be accessed and I will be happy to show you so we can better link the page. However, this one poster keeps putting the Gallup data on despite this. How do I stop him? ~~lneal001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lneal001 (talkcontribs) 22:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Best way would be to show him WP:Verifiability and WP:OR. Also respect WP:3RR. Inventing numbers is clearly original research. Massyparcer (talk) 01:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Avg wage[edit]

If you are going to use the ILO, you should use the more transparent and sourced statistics which I have found here:

http://w3.unece.org/pxweb/dialog/varval.asp?ma=60_MECCWagesY_r&path=../database/STAT/20-ME/3-MELF/&lang=1&ti=Gross+Average+Monthly+Wages+by+Country+and+Year

Lneal001 (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

We do not seem to agree on the use of ILO stats. Like I said it does not exist on ILO website any longer. I even CALLED them and an expert told me that the sources were simply not reliable. I do not see how you can keep justifying it. We already have 2 other lists, and by the way the MATCH ALMOST EXACTLY. As I told you before, some of the ILO stats for some countries are wrong, at least when compared to a figure representing all workers and such. If some countries are left out, then that's just the nature of these statistics. If you insist on ILO, then use it for countries not mentioned in the other two lists. But like I said, the entire list is full of errors as verified by using their own meth., and by the other two lists. They even said so!Lneal001 (talk) 02:43, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Claiming to have "phoned up" and doing your own math to claim they're wrong is a textbook example of violating WP:OR. You don't seem to understand the root of the problem that was raised not just by myself but also other experienced editors. You just can't remove a sourced list from a reliable organization like ILO, regardless of flaws. Massyparcer (talk)
Well you do not have to believe my phone call. Why else would it be non existent on ILO today. It was not sourced from ILO to begin with. At the present time it not only is flawed, but simply non-existent. Please find for me these numbers today on ILO. Also, you keep saying I am doing my own math calculations---I provided a source for the numerator and denominator to prove that the US figure was wrong, all from the org which has the official aggregate for wages and earners. It's just further corroboration. At this point we have many sources of evidence which corroborate that the ILO data from BBC was wrong: it does not exist on ILO website, the numbers using their own meth. do not match, the numbers do not compare with the UNECE/OECD figures, and in addition the BBC article is a few years old and these same numbers have not since been reported by anyone. Doesn't that mean anything to you? That is a lot of evidence. Lneal001 (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Again, your conspiracy theory against the BBC seriously needs to stop. We're not the one to judge whether they are flawed or not. Please let the readers make their own judgement about that. You must understand Wikipedia policies which is that sourced content from a reliable reference is perfectly acceptable. Of course the numbers from the BBC will not match up with either OECD or UN. Neither do UN or OECD because all of their methodologies differ. Massyparcer (talk) 06:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
But what is the ILO methodology? They get the "avg wage" and multiply by number of earners, is what I read? Well, what one country gives may not be an apples to apples comparison compared to what another gives. For instance, the US figure is much lower because they used an avg wage figure excluding all supervisory workers, govt workers, overtime, and including part time workers. Otherwise, it would have been higher like the OECD and UN, where they include all workers, extra cash payments like overtime, and convrt to full time. The UN and OECD match exactly---there's just a one year gap.Lneal001 (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

New average wage sections[edit]

There is someone trying to make duplicate average wage lists, such as the one below. Should they be deleted? Lneal001 (talk) 16:29, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_in_America_by_monthly_average_wage

Seems unnecessary. We should start a discussion on merging them. Massyparcer (talk) 04:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seoul, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SBS, MBC and Driverless (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) 08:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Household income (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Accommodation
Mobile banking (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bain

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seoul, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subway (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) 08:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited International rankings of South Korea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IMD (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) 08:51, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

HDI, average wage[edit]

Hello Massyparcer,

First part of sentence "South Korea is ranked as the world's 12th-most developed country in the Human Development Index" is much better than the previous version, but I still have some objections: HDI does not claim itself to be absolute measure of even "human development", leave alone "development" in general sense- just check the FAQ on the official page. There are many others measures of development, HDI is merely the most popularized one. Besides that "development" is perhaps inherently subjective

Rest of the sentence: "while in terms of average earnings, it is the wealthiest in Asia and 10th richest in the world" as it appears now is terrible from encyclopedic point:

2.) "Wealth" is a concept separate from "average earnings" and include total possessions, rather just a paycheck from employer 3.) Again: "richest country" is an umbrella term, it can mean several different things (average wage, GDP per capita, wealth per capita, total GDP etc.)

Why not just state facts and let the reader decide, what to think about them? That's what encyclopedia is for. Bontairo (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I have reflected your views on the article. Thanks. Massyparcer (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Net wages issue[edit]

Hi, please see my message in the talk page for wages. It's regarding the use of tax calculators. Lneal001 (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2014 (UTC)