User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom

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

And there is also This archive.



Thx 4 d barnstar :D. WIll do my best to make articles nicer to see and read. Ssven2 (talk)


Dude now check the main lead. Every thing mentioned is sourced and all sources are reliable. please check before reverting. myself cleaned unwanted the article looks perfect. Thanks Harirajmohanhrm talk (talk)‎ 14:40, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Discretionary sanctions notification - climate change[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 12:42, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


You tagged several songs with WP:CSD#A9. Unless the articles are untrue, in which case you need a different tag, they are not eligible for A9 because the artist or artists have articles on Wikipedia. Please be more careful using this tag. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:51, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Gekkos of Zimbabwe DrC.Humphreys (talk) 10:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC) Thank you for your invaluable Remarks on article. I have two questions 1. How you I retrieve the article Userfied by Alexf ? 2. If I were to title my article Endemic Geckos of Zimbabwe would it be more acceptable ? As vangenie says Geckos dont recognise human borders by they do recognise geography and exclusive habitats i.e. endemicity....the word endemic in embedded in the text several times DrC.Humphreys (talk) 10:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Slice and dice[edit]

Hey TRPoD - do you have any interest in taking your finely honed machete to clean this up? I've certainly seen worse, but it checks all the boxes: unsourced personal info, crappy sources, and ridiculous puffery (DYK she has "previously expressed a desire to win the Palme d'Or"?) I double dog dare you. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:01, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


Gekkos of ZimbabweAfroedura transvaalica Dear RedPenofDoom Thank you for your comments. I have tried to improve these articles (above) as you all of wikipedia its a work in is my ability to understand the wiki protocols and formatting language. I can see the points made about zimbabwe (that does not have a great deal of endemicity does though have endemic geckos) my article the species are listed in red.....the articles about the gecko genera also have the same species listed in red i.e. they are stubs or starters.....i intend to develop these stubs....(two have turned blue as I added to them) ...not because I am interested in those huge genera but more because I am interested in Zimbabwe's herpetofauna....i feel sure that others will see this as a useful contribution ...the british library and wikipedia are full of 'snails of fiji' or 'birds of east anglia' types of research.... does they need editing, collating into larger topics or can they stand on their own censured. The original administrator who deleted this suggested contacting Wikiproject Amphibians and Reptiles which I have done ...... as yet they havent replied....for some guidance. Thank you for your contribution Clive DrC.Humphreys (talk) 23:11, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Gilbert Ling Association Induction Hypothesis[edit]

Overall Comments[edit]

Within a period of 15 minutes you swing your scythe and remove 1/3rd of the article with no pre-discussion in the talk page and not justifiable comments (See below). I believe this is breaking the three revert rule. There was no discussion beforehand of these major edits contrary to WP:Edititing Policy Be_cautious_with_major_changes:_discuss

You then go on to edit other articles and coming back to the AIH article and perhaps speed read for about 5 minutes decide that the whole theory is a wingnut theory and not notable saying that in 50 years the only one who has written about this is Ling.

PaulGWiki (talk) 05:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Notability requires that third party reliable sources have discussed the topic of the article. The article contained no evidence that third parties had discussed the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 10:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Nip Gamergate in the bud. Thank you. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 10:23, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected[edit]

The request for formal mediation concerning GamerGate (controversy), to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Discussion at Talk:Asian American#Radical infobox changes[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Radical infobox changes. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:37, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Discussion of Shobana filmography[edit]

Hi there, I was trying to add the filmography details from the existing wiki pages, but I found you have reverted with comment, unsourced. The details are from the existing wiki pages.Vaidyasr (talk) 19:39, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014[edit]

  • Hi, you are busy for long time on the article Mahira Khan to spoil deliberately other editors works, you don't own the article. You edits fall under I don't like it, I hope this helps.Justice007 (talk) 10:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Please do not gaming the system, I am not going to ignore your continually disruptive edits, if you have concerns, discuss on the talk page of the article and reach a consensus rather reverting good faith edits as you don't like it. Justice007 (talk) 17:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)


I would like to get your opinion on a BLP issue. The William Lane Craig article has been bannered since June for being too technical and containing excessive material based on sources too closely associated with the subject himself; most of the new text appears to have been added in May with edits like these (1, 2, 3, 4). Do you think the banner is correct, or do you think the article is better with the material? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 14:48, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Copy-pasted-formatted one of your comments, please check[edit]

Hi, I excerpted stuff from a long thread to start a poll. I included a comment by you in the new thread. I made some small formatting changes, including wording in the bolded !vote. I'll be glad to cut and paste precise text you posted before if you think the original will help a neutral closer understand your intent better than the tweaks I made. Could you please take a sec to check it out, and make sure its ok? Thanks, and apologies if I overstepped. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Regardless of !vote thanks for taking time[edit]

Whatever you think of the idea to also require secondary RSs at "List of scientists opposing the mainstream assessment of global warming", thanks for taking time to participate in the poll on that question. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:34, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

oops, technically speaking, I guess you didn't respond the formatted poll question (see prior thread). I sent this boilerplate thank you to everyone who has !voted and your !vote was copy-pasted from an earlier thread. But thank you nonetheless. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-notice.svg Please read this notification carefully:
A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. RGloucester 21:51, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

Thank you much for the kind welcome to WP. Even though I've been around a while, it made me feel appreciated. It's humorous that I finally registered an account to stop catching flak for being an IP editor, then immediately get burned for being a new account. C'est la vie, and your courtesy is an antidote. TuxedoMonkey (talk) 03:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

S. Truett Cathy[edit]

Please see Talk:S._Truett_Cathy#RfC:_.22anti-gay.22.2C_again. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)