- 1 Thought
- 2 I think you made a mistake
- 3 May 2014
- 4 Negroni cocktail
- 5 from john graham, is this how I correspond with you?
- 6 Jermaine Jackson
- 7 Sex Doll
- 8 Oleksiy Oliynyk / scarf hold headlock
- 9 WP:CONSENSUS
- 10 July 28
- 11 John Cage, 4'33"
- 12 Jadoon Article
- 13 A barnstar for you!
- 14 Please stop
- 15 Vandalism
- 16 America's Team
- 17 Vigmans draughts and 8x10 draughts.
- 18 Delete/Reverts
- 19 Vandalism
- 20 man010sallow
- 21 This is not spamming
- 22 Absolutely ridiculous
- 23 question
- 24 My Question !
- 25 Thank You
- 26 Edits - American Football
- 27 Rollback
- 28 you are part of isis
- 29 you are part of isis
- 30 Jimmy Tatro Picture
- 31 Your Opinion
- 32 Anthony Johnson
BTW -- I'm fine (at least to the extent I've thought it through) with your deletion of ethnicity from a lede, per the MOS. But I would also be fine with it as it was, for a major league baseball player where the ethnicity (as there) qualifies him to play for a certain nation in the World Baseball Classic (as was the case there). I think that's in line with the MOS, which indicates that ":Context (location, nationality, or ethnicity)" should be reflected, and that "Ethnicity ... should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability." The same would hold for athletes that participate in Maccabiah or the like. Best. --Epeefleche (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I think you made a mistake
I changed a part of the info of the Nicole Kidman's biography because there is an official source that says that. Kidmam reveals to a journalist that her real born name is Hokulani and she really born in Oahu Island, Hawaii. This is the source, the page is in Spanish. E! Entertainment Televisión Argentina: http://la.eonline.com/andes/2014/nicole-kidman-confeso-no-ser-australiana-ni-tampoco-llamarse-nicole-kidman/ El Espectador: http://www.elespectador.com/entretenimiento/arteygente/gente/nicole-kidman-revela-no-se-llama-nicole-articulo-491173 Waiting for your answer please about it. I just want to support Wikipedia with current information. Please correct your mistake inmedeately. Thank You. --Josuecedeno1 (talk) 22:22, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- and began playing many sports from a young age, including basketball, cricket, and track and field]. Barnatt also trained in [[Tae Kwon Do]], achieving the rank of yellow belt after a year.<ref>http:
Hello SQGibbon, I'm a newspaper reporter researching the Negroni cocktail. I see that you've deleted posts from the Negroni family (with whom I've spoken) about their alternative theory of the origins of the drink. Can you tell me why you've done so? Also, how confident are you when it comes to the Count Camillo origin? Thanks, MrkHay302 MrkHay302 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC) Thanks so much for your response, SQ.
Memo for SQGibbon and Denisarona Subject: Negroni Cocktail
First of all I want to apologize for my fellow wikipedians for providing edits to the Negroni Cocktail Page that you object to. It was not my intent to provide "disruptive editing" nor to trample on the Wikipedia norms. I fully understand that the reason why I received warnings, is because I repeatedly added material, despite the objections of others. I know that Wikipedia is a collaborative enterprise, meaning that when we have disputes, we should not simply edit back and forth. I am reaching out to you to see if we can resolve this dispute. I know that Wikipedia does not know the credentials of authors, and in fact does not pay much attention to them. This is because Wikipedia relies on citations to reliable, third party sources like scientific journals, newspapers or blogs with editorial structures, books, and so on. The reason the material is being removed is because you are adding it without reference to secondary source material. With that in mind, I would like to plead my case before my fellow wikipedians.
I have great reservations regarding the person known as Count Camillo Negroni for several reasons:
1. In our family genealogical records going back to the 11th century, there no one by the name of Count Camillo (Sources: Authier, Michel et Alain Galbrun, Etat de la Noblesse Francaise Subsistance, 1940-1993, pp. 153-160; Cere, Luigi Arturo, Storia dell'illustra famiglia genovese dei Negroni, Genes, 1927; Negroni, Francois Marquis de, de Negroni de San Colombano Family Archives: Negroni, Roch Pascal Marie Cyr Marquis de, Histoire de l'Ancienne Seigneurie de San Colombano ou Capo Corso et de Capraia, Imp. Lavalloise, Laval (Mayenne), 1896, 311 pages: Pazzis, Henry de Seguins Pazzis d'Aubignam Marquis de, Genealogie de la Famille Negroni et ses Alliances, 1980, 315 page manuscript prepared as one of the requirements to become a Knight of Malta; Negroni, Hector Andres, 1938- The Negroni family : genealogical, demographic, and nobiliary study from its 11th century origins to its 20th century branches in Italy, France, and Puerto Rico Madison, AL : H.A. Negroni, , 149 pages : ill., maps ; 28 cm, Library of Congress Control Number: 98119631
2. The paper back book by Luca Picchi, Sulle tracce del conte. La vera storia del cocktail «Negroni» is nothing more than a marketing pamphlet to promote visits to Mr. Picchi's bar in Florence.
3. Despite numerous requests, Mr. Picchi has nor provided our family with birth, death or genealogical information on "Count Camillo Negroni." As a result, we can only conclude that "Count Camillo is a result of Mr Picchi's fertile imagination.
On the other hand, to support our thesis, we can provide ample genealogical information on General Pascal Olivier Comte de Negroni. He was real person with real accomplishments. Tell me what you need and I will provide the information for your examination and evaluation. Additionally, there was a newspaper reference to Pascal's invention of the Negroni cocktail (Source: “Corse Matin Sunday Edition," 2 February 1980).
As an amicable resolution to this issue I recommend that we place both theories being equal in value and let the readers make up their mind.
I can also provide you with my CV if you desire.
from john graham, is this how I correspond with you?
Thanks so much for your patience with me. I did not know about "talk pages" -- I thought I just had the few key strokes to explain myself and the entry.
The new strategy (or theory) of negotiation, INVENTIVE NEGOTIATION, is ours and is based on the integration of the ideas we cite in the entry -- Raiffa, etc. and Silicon Valley, Japan, etc., and 30 years of academic study of the phenomenon. I also guess you could say we borrowed it from the Japanese. The thinking is detailed in our new book, Inventive Negotiation.
I would assume that WIKI readers would be interested in new fundamental views about a phenomenon, but I would not expect them to know about it until they have read the new book.
As to the "undue weight criticism" -- I think I put it in the right place. Perhaps there is a better place for it on the page? New ideas, or something?
As the "undue length" -- I feel it needs the added explanation and citations because it is new, and the sources deserve credit.
As to the conflict of interest criticism, I can understand why one might conclude that my self interest/promotion motivates the entry. However, what is important here is the idea itself, not the authors. Father Gregory Boyle at Homeboy Industries, for one, would testify that this third approach saves lives. The problem with both distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining is that they do not work very well. Indeed, most people around the world focus on relationships, not transactions. The literature on negotiation in the US suffers dramatically from a dangerous, even fatal, ethnocentrism. We detail this argument in the book. But it is based on 30 years of studying how others around the world negotiate.
Now may I ask for your help here. How should I introduce a new (disruptive) idea to a Wikipedia audience? We are trying to save lives and global resources here. Please help!
- Hi John. Thankyou for starting a conversation here about your proposed addition to negotiation. This should be applauded. Please do not, however, reapply your edit before there has been discussion with other concerned editors. I.e. you should give SQGibbon some time to respond. How long should you wait? That is highly subjective, but I tend to wait between a week and a month depending on the edit. It is probably also worth pointing out that the article talk page may have been a better location for this conversation as it is easier for multiple editors to keep apprised.
- In terms of the merits of your edit, thank for being honest about your relationship with the material and the aims of your editing. Unfortunately, at this stage I do not think you should be editing on the topic of your own book. Wikipedia is not a place for promotion, advocacy, or original research, and your edit is pretty clearly all three. Really the best course of action would be to promote your book and views through other avenues. Should it receive sufficient notoriety and third party verification it will naturally come to be included in Wikipedia. If you really want to do something now, it might be acceptable for you to add a note to the negotiation talk page suggesting the coverage of "Inventive Negotiation", but you will have to make it clear that it is a reputable perspective and not just spam (e.g. detail any peer reviewed coverage of the topic that there might be).
- Anyway, I hope this helps and best of luck with your editing. Cheers Andrew (talk) 00:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Jermaine Jackson changed his name to jermaine jasksun. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/jermaine-jackson-changes-last-name-to-jacksun-20130223 just due to your ignorance you cannot alter wiki pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 10:34, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand your removal of either Removed image "Sandy" points out rust on a car for an ebay advert and achieves notoriety in the press and on internet with speculation as to whether she is a sex doll or not . . .]] or the photograph of "Sandy on her day off" either of which are current examples of the subjectmatter.
You will see from http://dollforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=143&t=54281 that the story is quite unique in its reach in the history of sex dolls and their use by photographers as posable mannequins. The ebay page received 40000 visits during the week and the story being published by major newspapers, The Daily Mail, The Mirror and The Metro in the UK and London, the image and story was seen by not merely hundreds of thousands but millions of people. It has been syndicated throughout VolksWagen dealerships also. The image of "high quality sex doll" at the top of this page is a disgusting and revolting example bringing "sex dolls" into disrepute, and whilst it might have been a fair example a few years ago, it is far outdated now, as the photos of "Sandy" picked up by the newspapers and internet sites demonstrate.
Dollist (talk) 13:36, 14 June 2014 (UTC) Thanks for your helpful and guiding comments which are noted. Very much a matter both of enthusiasm combined with, and therein the danger, knowledge garnered from the forums and personal experience of such over many years - but in that is experience which can assist in guiding the subject helpfully within appropriate standards of citations and neutrality. The files https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sandydayoff.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sandyrust.jpg are now restored and in the public domain and I submit are useful (a) as a current example of a "high end" doll rather than a former generation, or as a contrast showing the development from only a few years ago, and (b) in their capacity to be used for modelling art and photography rather than as purely sex function objects. Having provided these into the public domain, perhaps can I leave it to you to consider how best they might be used most usefully within the subject?
Possibly a caption such as . . . Removed image
Apologies for forgetting to sign.
I hope these images are potentially useful: "sex dolls" have moved on beyond imagination and they illustrate the new generation of posable mannequin far from that arguably deserving ridicule in the past.
Having found learned analysis http://www.ejhs.org/volume15/Bare.html about the problems of the sexual imbalance currently in China and leading to a fast emerging sex toy industry seen as a pacification of the problems caused, it seemed appropriate to introduce https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sandyrust.jpg to the page in the context of the new breed of sex-dolls that are emerging within this market in response to the demographic issue. In view of the significant visual improvement from the older generation of sex doll illustrating the top of the page, perhaps consideration might be given for this more attractive example to illustrate the article. I have used an abbreviated caption hopefully with the same sentiment of meaning implied before.
Different languages of the Sex Doll page accessible through Google Translate vary from straightforward stubs such as https://tl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manikang_pantalik to direct translations of the page to pages with expanded sections - such as Sex Dolls in the media for instance including pop groups and in particular the Japanese film Air Doll in 2009 (from memory French and German versions) to the Czech page which is arguably imposing judgment on users of sex dolls and justifications with "Advantages" and "Disadvantages" and focusing only on Inflatable dolls without mention of Silicone dolls https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nafukovac%C3%AD_panna . The page https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%BAp_b%C3%AA_t%C3%ACnh_d%E1%BB%A5c features a photo with a doll tied up, mixing a BDSM connotation with sex dolls which is not universal.
Personally I find the doll example on many pages Removed image rather gross - and for that reason potentially prejudicial within the subject - but without consensus this is a subjective opinion. I do note however that the example photograph is of a 2006 model and Sandy Removed image demonstrates significant advancement of the genre over the intervening years.
Oleksiy Oliynyk / scarf hold headlock
I think it gets pretty evident that if both Oleksiy and Anthony say it was not a neck crank, it was really not a neck crank. The source we included there says so. As for calling it a scarf hold headlock, if you checked side control / kesa-gatame and Kesa-gatame, what doubt can there be? The position is explained, you get to see photos, both articles have sources... how is it not enough?Psycho-Krillin (talk) 15:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
You cannot call it a neck crank when Oleksiy says "It was not a neck crank despite what they announced". The source clearly states that. Call it simply a submission, then! Psycho-Krillin (talk) 16:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
editors who ignore talk page discussions yet continue to edit in or revert disputed material may be guilty of disruptive editing and incur sanctions
Seems clear. I urge you to self-revert as otherwise you may be viewed as engaging in a deliberate edit war. Cheers.
John Cage, 4'33"
Hello, I'm curious why you edited out the mention of a cover of 4'33" with this comment:
"Does not appear to be a notable performance by a notable group as discussed by an independent and reliable source."
The band is an actual band on an actual label with actual, pressed CDs. It's not a performance, but a recording, and the section is titled "Performances and recordings".
There are plenty of sources showing this, even if one were to ignore the length and content of the track.
Dear SQGibbon - I chose you because once you helped me understand the Wikipedia editing process, and which I now follow - one of the wiki contributors - Sitush is threatening me with sanctions for contributing to an article on Jadoons. This is a genuine Pashtun tribe, but on which the writings were written mostly from Persian translations during the British colonial era, like many of the Pashtun and other tribes through out the world. It is not my fault that there are not current people studying this tribe or writing about it. But what earlier people have written about it should be allowed to stay. Where am I making the mistake? There are many tribes in the Afghan-Indo Continent metioned on Wikipedia that were written only during the British Colonial encounter - why are they allowed to stay and not this one. Thanks - sorry to bring you into this. ~ Mulberry sky.
A barnstar for you!
|The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar|
|Thanks for your editings on Benson Henderson and Rafael dos Anjos pages Chosen Um (talk) 23:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)|
Hello. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Rashad Evans because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Rashad Evans because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message. Thanks!18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi there SQGibbon. I'm RyAce77. I've been adding the additional remarks to the article "Americas Team." Even though the term America's team was coined for and is oft applied to the Dallas Cowboys, the term is not definitive. In other words it is often argued, especially by those of a non-Dallas fanbase, that they are not always considered "America's Team." This idea and controversy needs to be highlighted in the article. By leaving out these noted challenges to this term, you are leaving the article with a one-sided bias not allowing others to see that the Cowboys are not solely considered Americas team and not always thought of as such.
I think it is good to show the history of the term and also that the Cowboys do hold that nickname but I also think it is worthwhile to show how the term has evolved and what people currently think about it of which information I applied with linked references. I apologize for the many edits as I'm just now learning how to use Wikipedia and have just created an account. I've been reading up on on ownership of articles and editing policies as to contribute properly. Thank you for showing me about talk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyAce77 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Vigmans draughts and 8x10 draughts.
Dear Mr. SQGibbon Thanks for your contribution. You have deleted some kind of Basic information. But that was 100 right. You should be learn that, this is Bangladeshi article and here is 90% people are Muslims. But you have deleted the information of religion (like as Muslim) and Birth date. Plz see the other related language article and read the article first then delete or revert. Thank you. — Masum Ibn Musa Conversation 07:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
ok how do I do a consensus or whatever on my phone? and brown eyed handsome man is Rock n roll, not R&B and anyone will listens to it would know, tell me how I do what ever I have to do for you to stop bugging the hell out of me! I use my phone all I see is an edit button and an optional explanation, how do I make edits to genres that are incorrect?! how do I get source to decide what genre a song is? that's not something you can source, you just listen to it, if it says R&B but it sounds like Rock N Roll Why not put rock n roll there??! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Man010sallow (talk • contribs) 22:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
This is not spamming
The references/bibliographic contents I have added in the pages are in direct relation to the topics in question. This is undoubtedly not any spam or promotional content. Without knowing the history of the Indian subcontinent or the history of Colonial Bengal, do not revert changes to the bibliographic contents or references to the pages. Thank you, --User:Locomotive999
I don't mean to sound offensive, but I strongly advise you refrain from editing articles that concern MMA. You clearly do not know what you're doing. Sherdog does not always have everything right, UFC's official profiles are much more relevant than what sherdog claims. We look at sherdog only for their MMA record, not their biographic info. Looking at your talk page, you've managed to annoy MANY other users as well. Please just stop. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
My Question !
Hello ! Why a database with all tone rows of schoenbergh, berg and webern and many others till now registered and searchable in the rubric: "Search the database for musical information" be inappropriate for the schoenberg, berg and webern - wikipedia -sites? Did you really get the content of this database so quickly, that you should be allowed to remove it ? Certainly i don't want to spam there. Paramelin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramelin (talk • contribs) 19:25, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Edits - American Football
Thanks SQ - I'll re post with some outside coverage ref - - this league is stunning in that it influenced many IDP scoring strategies that are widely used now, decades ahead of the majors. Additionally, the continuity of the league is unique and contribution to scoring techniques is widely used. I am unsure if I should include the ref to the league as it now exist on the web for folks to see . . . your thoughts? I am new to posting on wiki so I only today saw your message.
1/6 SQ 0- I'll get the links from a few other published sites - honestly - there is a lot to question in this post - big fish always like to lay claim to little fish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 11:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I have granted rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. 15:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC)– Gilliam (talk)
you are part of isis
you are part of isis
Jimmy Tatro Picture
You tell me that that is not how you put a picture up so inform me on how to so I can. Thanks