User talk:The Magnificent Clean-keeper

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Unless requested, I will respond to posts on the page where the conversation started as a means of keeping the conversation together. If you leave me a message here, please watchlist this page for the duration of the discussion. If I posted on your talk page, I will watch your page for responses. Thanks, TMC (and thanks to Happyme22 for creating this message box).
Furthermore, if you need a response ASAP, please say so here on my talk. If I don't respond within 2 to 3 days to a discussion on your talkpage while being active on WP otherwise or you responded later than 2 to 3 days of my last comment on your talk please remind me as I might have missed your further input.


While you here, it might be worth to check out the following petition:
Wikipedia:Petition to the WMF on handling of interface changes


I'm a proud American who hails to Eric Arthur Blair's (former fictional) leader, represented by various front people for a prolonged period of time. I'm grateful for having my e-mails and postal mail scanned and my phone calls supervised just as my Internet activities. Also I'm very pleased to know that I'm not left out and can do my part, having the honor of paying for those basic services that are essential and a must have in any free society, just like ours which is a shining role model especially for second and third world countries. We sure don't need all those privacy and other rights since they're only there to potentially harm our government that we chose to assist us in our own decision making. Thank you and God bless, (although his main job of watching over us was outsourced/taken over by our multiple choice [2 to be precise] elected government.)
Note: Wish it would fit in the funnies section on my user page, but it would've been "off topic" there.




---/Archive 1
---/Archive 2
---/Archive 3
---/Archive 4
---/Archive 5
---/Archive 6

Contents

Civility[edit]

Your statement of "too much ignorance from computer freaks" is immensely insulting, uncivil, and unfriendly. Attitudes like that, are why people leave communities.

Demeaning and insulting a group of people, dehumanizing them with an us vs them mentality, is the cause of so much pain and anger in the world. Please don't add to it.

And the method for removing the "This page has been added to your watch-list" is directly above your disrespectful message:

Add .mw-notification-tag-watch-self {display: none;} to your common.css.

You're welcome. –Quiddity (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the script but the problem is not my "incivility" perceived by you but the ignorance of those I called upon. Try looking at the big picture and try to determine what triggered what. Remember the chicken and egg? In this case there is no question about what came first. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 23:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Modifying the Wikipedia interface[edit]

Take a look at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 111#Hiding the BLP editnotice for instructions on how to selectively disable nearly any part of the interface. It also links to a few user script pages with examples of how it works. – Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks a lot for your tip. I just added it to my CSS page. Best to you, TMCk (talk) 22:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Vehicle leasing[edit]

Dear Clean-keeper, I added those links to What Car? because they seem reasonable sources for the article. SOme of that information could be added to the article, but I'm not qualified to do that. I just added the links, so someone else can expand it. Can you do that? Thanks! --NaBUru38 (talk) 16:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi NaBUru38. There are several problems with your link. One is that it is a commercial link, not on first sight but if you dig further you'll find that they promote dealers in leasing and sale of new and used cars. The other problem is that it is not a [[wp:RS|reliable source as it isn't independent. To add UK specific lease details you should find an independent reliable source and add content sourced to that source to the article. External links should add high quality content that can't be included in the article. There were several attempts in the past to add promo links with similar information given in your links but didn't stay due to out [[wp:EL|external link policy. Hope this was helpful to you. Best, TMCk (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I know that What Car? is a commercial website, but the pages I added describe characteristics, pros and cons of the different leasing types. It sounds reasonable to me. Bye! --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Alex Jones[edit]

I was actually doing a favor for someone and saw the edit. Didn't see a source and looking over the editor's talk page it seemed like a situation that called for a revert. [1]. Malke 2010 (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

No big deal. It's just that that guy is most famous (in the US) as a conspiracy theorist, but you might not have known this and the Rolling Stones citation isn't absolutely clear about that. Of course it's always better to use caution in a BLP. In that case it just happened to be something like removing a known politician's party affiliation b/c of missing a clear source ;)
TMCk (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't know him at all. Never heard of him, so it wouldn't be like a known pol for me. Malke 2010 (talk) 22:53, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I didn't know him either (even so I watched "Loose Change" at some point) until I "discovered" him through entries in other WP articles ;)
TMCk (talk) 23:55, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
What's "Loose Change?" Malke 2010 (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Loose Change (film series). Jones was an executive producer. Not worth watching but you should make up your mind yourself and not take my word which is of course my opinion.TMCk (talk) 01:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Your word is good with me. I'll skip it. Thanks. Malke 2010 (talk) 01:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm delighted :)
BTW, who's editor's talk page were you referring to?TMCk (talk) 02:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
You know. You commented there on his talk page regarding the edit. I can't remember his wiki name and I'm not interested enough to go looking for it. Have a nice weekend! Malke 2010 (talk) 01:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I commented there after I fixed the BLP problem they introduced and maybe they'll do better in the future. Don't worry about the rest as it's old news by now. I too wish you a very nice weekend. See you around, TMCk (talk) 01:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

interface changes[edit]

I followed your link. I didn't have any system problems like a few users there. Locking up for months? Ugh! I like the new notice of messages rather than that dreadful banner across the talk page. It always struck fear in me like I'd just been called to the head's office. I was surprised that there hadn't been mention of the changes prior to. Or if there had been, I must have missed them. Malke 2010 (talk) 01:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, they fixed the notice bugs and re-implemented a small orange bar after much complains. See Wikipedia talk:Notifications and Wikipedia:Notifications for info about that specific issue. The petition I link at the top of my page is not just about how they introduced the new notification, it was just a starter for those kind of changes in general. Now that the notification change was changed and debugged I don't have much of a problem with it either but it was a problem for about a week and there are other constant changes that are screwed up while not every editor is aware of or affected. Believe me, if you were affected and would've problems editing b/c of such (usually unannounced) changes you'd be, quite frankly, pissed off like many affected users. But of course it's fine if you're not interested in that petition; It's everybody's freedom to have their own opinion and priorities. Whatever works.TMCk (talk) 01:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I didn't say I wasn't interested, only that I'd not been affected. Your explanation makes it all very clear now. I can see being upset by things like that. They've made changes before and always had a warning, testing period. They seem not to have bothered this time. I'll sign the petition if it's going to help change that. Malke 2010 (talk) 05:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I signed the petition and am going to post that link I just copied from you on my talk page. Malke 2010 (talk) 05:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I just saw it (and I'm delighted :) ) when I had to respond to a developer who kept quiet until another programming genius posted a critical comment about main developers here. He's BS-ing me by passing the blame instead of commenting constructive and maybe solving the actual problem. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 05:48, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
And yes, what you describe as a "'heads-up' notice" is a major point of basics they should provide in front.TMCk (talk) 05:55, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
TMCk, I'm not a developer, and I don't know if Wikid77 is a programming genius (nor do I care) because my commentary is nothing to do with his code or anyone else's. The tone and attitude you're taking in this conversation to a fellow volunteer is completely inappropriate. I am not "BS-ing" you, and such a statement of bad faith is unbecoming of any editor. Ironholds (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I've responded her at the village pump where this started.TMCk (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, The Magnificent Clean-keeper. You have new messages at Ironholds's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Miscellany for deletion/User:Groupuscule/GMO[edit]

Would love to see your response to my comments here if and when you have time. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 08:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I do have some time issues but besides that, I'm not sure what else to say besides what I've already said and to which I still stand to. Repetition would only clutter the MFD and there is not much more to say IMO. Maybe, even so unlikely, we get some more uninvolved input from other editors and if not, we'll see what the closing admin's rationale will be, no matter the way they'll decide. Thanks for pointing me out to the latest posts over there thou.TMCk (talk) 01:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

visual editor RfC[edit]

Thought you might want to weigh in on this: [2]. Malke 2010 (talk) 02:34, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Malke. I'm aware of that page but still hesitating to vote or comment even so I've made up my mind about this. I'm considering placing some votes with comments at some point. We'll see.TMCk (talk) 03:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Revert Hyperloop[edit]

I gave actually a source for my edit, please check: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hyperloop&diff=568845000&oldid=568805169 --Schwobator (talk) 08:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Only your source, which by btw was an opinion piece, didn't really back up your edit. Although I reversed you edit, I clarified the fact presented as it was only true in part. Some might doubt the costs being feasible as presented but even if it seems (for some) or is, even as a fact, difficult to achieve as proposed, that doesn't make it a false statement.TMCk (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Revert Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories[edit]

Hi. Your reversion note says "blogs, especially those are not a reliable source and can't be used." I'm not sure what you mean. The most useful source I cited was http://barackryphal.blogspot.com/2011/06/secret-origin-part-2.html which is technically a blog, but really a place that Loren Collins collects his research. Collins is referenced by e.g. http://www.politifact.com/personalities/loren-collins/ for what that's worth. There isn't any published material that I know of that goes into as much detail as Collins' pages about this esoteric subject. I'm not much of a Wikipedia expert, so -- any suggestions on how I could present this information better? -- JamieMcCarthy (talk) 23:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jamie. The Blog might be useful for personal research but in WP we only can add content based on reliable sources which blogs, with few exceptions (I.e. news-blogs), aren't.TMCk (talk) 13:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks for your help, and thanks for the link to WP:RS -- I probably should have read that first! So... I guess when writing on the subject of when and where claims first appeared on the internet, it would be OK to link to the actual blog pages which made those claims at that time, right? I would think those pages would be essentially primary sources, though I'm not sure. The page says "specific facts may be taken from primary sources," which I'd hope means linking to the actual source would be acceptable in this case. I've noted the WP:PRIMARY cautions "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source" and "be cautious about basing large passages on them." If you think it'd be appropriate, I'll try resubmitting just the narrow facts of these claims first appearing. -- JamieMcCarthy (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, it's a little bit more complicated than that. Since I don't have much time on hand, why don't you visit the wp:Teahouse where you'll sure get plenty of help. To ask a question you can go directly to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions and you could add a link to our short conversation here when asking your question(s) over there. Hope that helps, TMCk (talk) 23:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Will do, and thanks for the time you've already spent on this! :) JamieMcCarthy (talk) 14:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

E-cig liquid[edit]

Hi there. That's a common thing to get confused about! The two measuring systems in use are % and mg per ml. 2.4% is equal to 24mg/ml, and I imagine that's what you have.--FergusM1970Let's play Freckles 15:33, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Note to self: Response moved to his talk

Thanks[edit]

For your comment on the edit war board. I'd meant to apologize for reverting your change within all the edits going back and forth. It's crazy over there unfortunately. Thanks for your help! IWannaPeterPumpkinEaterPeterParker (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Barbie's Amanda Knox book[edit]

That is an old edition of the book and discussion of it before the acquittal of Amanda Knox now worthless. The title and ISBN identifies a specific edition of the book which can't be in the 'Further reading section' of an article for BLP reasons. Take it back out please, ASAP.Overagainst (talk) 16:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Roman Polanski probation[edit]

I have reverted your deletion of the "Citation Needed" tag that I put in place concerning that "probation was expected." Simultaneously I have started a new section on that article's talk page concerning this. Rather than deleting the tag, I suggest that you may explain your deletion there. But I much prefer that perhaps you collaborate with finding citable sources to clarify who specifically was expecting that Roman Polanski was going to receive probation. Otherwise, as I said in my edit summary placing the tag in the first place, the part of the sentence that says "and it was expected that he would only receive probation at his sentencing" is completely unjustified. And why I placed the tag rather than deleting it outright. While your edit summary says that other sources in the article justify this, perhaps you could point out which one and use that as a referable source at the end of that sentence. Nodekeeper (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

O'Keefe[edit]

Thanks! How did you find that? I find it very difficult to iterate through all the different edits. --Sarahp48 (talk) 05:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Simply by looking up the edit history. You removed it right after my last edit here while "consolidating identical links" as I pointed out in my edit summary.TMCk (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

State of the Beach[edit]

Did you find the "State of the Beach" in PDF, that Mother Jones was quoting? Can you link it? Geogene (talk) 01:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

See page 24, 37, 58, 140 and 175. Try Ctrl + F ;) TMCk (talk) 01:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Ah. Okay. By the way, calling me out on plankton the other day I consider to be particularly good work. Geogene (talk) 01:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome and thanks.TMCk (talk) 01:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Corexit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page OSHA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a ridisambiguation 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) 09:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

re:Copy right violations[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your advice about my edits. According to your comments, I edited again the articles about Jjigae and Tteokguk. I'm wondering that my recent edits are okay. Can you check them for me?? :) -- Kjeongeun (talk) 05:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the "torture/"stoning" issue..[edit]

Forgive me if this is not the correct place to address you, as I am new to Wikipedia. I wish to state, in the least accusatory or offensive manner possible (I'm not here to pick fights or fling mud) that your most recent deletion of my edit makes me feel that you may be viewing this issue through the prism of your own beliefs/erroneous interpretations of the matter at hand. I took the time to write a very lengthy explanation addressing the multiple reasons for my edit. Within moments, you undone my revision, and the comment made it clear that you did not read or understand what I wrote. The link which you provided describes something very different indeed. Furthermore, as I clearly stated more than once, the source which you provide does not describe in any way that which is described in your recent link (The History of Torture), nor does the source which that source cites, which is the Christian bible. I do not feel that you can defend your revision of my edits, and if you can, it would require a new source. I agree that what is described in the "History of Torture" source is torture, yet please read what I wrote, as I address that a) there is a prohibition on causing unnecessary suffering in Judaism, and b) a prohibition on causing a corpse to be mutilated - clearly, the scenario described in your source would violate these commandments. Please respond, as I would like to discuss this, as in as civil a manner as possible, because I genuinely do not feel that your actions have been correct in this matter. Abu~Labid al~Zuraiqi [נשיקות פיהו] (talk) 00:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


It would seem that, in my inexperience here, I unintentionally posted a comment to you under a section that dealt with copyright issues. Please excuse me, I'm trying to figure this out as I go. Now, that being said, I would like to reiterate my request that you read the lengthy reasoning behind my edit, which I hope/believe is located on a discussion page relating to the "torture" section as a whole, and the discussions of the various sub-sections. Furthermore, I have compiled a list of the most authoritative sources which describe, explicitly, that the procedure in question involved a fall from a height, and not a pelting with stones. There have been many, many commentaries on this subject, but they all revolve around these primary sources - specifically, the description of the procedure, the reasoning for that particular procedure, and the like. I'm certain that you can find this in English somewhere, though you would probably have to buy the books (if you want it in English). The issue is that this is an advanced subject, and it is assumed (or, more accurately, it goes without saying) that anyone who has reached a point where they are studying this has a high level of Hebrew fluency and good knowledge or Aramaic as well. None-the-less, here are several primary sources detailing the method in which this was carried out: Mishnah, Order of Damages, Tractate Sanhedrin, Chapter 6:4 Tosefta on Damages, Tractate Sanhedrin, Chapter 9:3 Mishneh Torah leRambam, Judges, Laws of the High Court: Capitol Offences: Methodology and Application of Penalties and Execution Now, I have tranlated the names of the chapters, and subchapters, if you would like the names of any of these sources in either the original Hebrew or in transliterated form, just let me know. Please give me the benefit of the doubt, and believe me when I say that I have not come here to whitewash, mischaracterize. apologize for, &tc any aspects of Judaism which are accurately represented, and have negative associations. What I am definitely here to do is work to get an accurate description of those aspects which are not represented properly, and whoever decides that they find something unpleasant or illogical, that is their right - but I want them to be put off by something that really exists, not by something that does not. I hope that was clear. Please respond when you can. Abu~Labid al~Zuraiqi [נשיקות פיהו] (talk) 01:45, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

First: What Huon said!
Second: Please do not assume any reasons for my edits other than applying WP standards. Thanks.TMCk (talk) 21:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

See what "history"?[edit]

You proceeded your reversion by a Talk page reply did you? I looked at the history and you have not had anything at all to say for more than a month.--Brian Dell (talk) 18:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bacula[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bacula. 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, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. 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) 00:08, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jodie Foster[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jodie Foster. 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) 00:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features). 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) 00:09, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Conchita Wurst[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Conchita Wurst. 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, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ian Gow[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ian Gow. 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) 00:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for clarification[edit]

Hello! Could I ask you to take a look at Talk:Albert Einstein? In the RfC it has been requested that we post only in one section or the other, namely, the version that we support - and that if we posted in both sections, we merge our comments into the section we support. In particular, in this comment by you - "Support more likely as pointed out in my non-support below in the "support" section" - it's pretty much impossible to tell what you mean. Would you mind merging and clarifying? Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 18:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Melanie. I'll try to get to it later this evening when I should have more time on hand. Thanks for dropping me a note about it ;) TMCk (talk) 18:46, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Yank Barry[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Yank Barry. 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, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Blue Army (Poland)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Blue Army (Poland). 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) 00:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States Senate election in Maine, 2014[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States Senate election in Maine, 2014. 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) 00:03, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notification[edit]

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

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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. 

In addition to the discretionary sanctions a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction applies to articles broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, editors may be blocked without warning if they breach this restriction. Please review this section for more information.

Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 05:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Billy McFarland[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Billy McFarland. 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) 00:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Retrospective diagnoses of autism[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Retrospective diagnoses of autism. 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, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Celebes crested macaque[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Celebes crested macaque. 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, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Ice hockey people from Ontario[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Ice hockey people from Ontario. 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) 00:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Game of Thrones (season 5)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Game of Thrones (season 5). 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) 00:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on this RfC[edit]

Hello Magnificent Clean-Keeper: Per policy on publicizing an RfC whilst waiting on the bot notification, you’ve been selected from the list of editors on the RfC page.

The RfC the link is here.

Should we keep these newly created separate country articles about the Ebola epidemic?

You participation would be greatly appreciated.

SW3 5DL (talk) 21:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: WP:BURDEN[edit]

Regarding this edit: yes, I could have tried Google. But the WP:BURDEN is on the party seeking to add material, so it's not exactly the best form to tell me that I should go around searching for sources for a statement with which I don't agree. And the source you added doesn't actually back up the statement that both protests and campaigns are common in the small seaside town in question. The two examples refer to one tweet by an unreliable, biased source claiming to be protesting on the ground, and another tweet that most likely was posted from the Ambassador's Residence hundreds of miles away in Tokyo. I'm not going to revert you, but in the future could you try to be a bit more careful about re-adding unsourced statements, with sources that actually say something else? And not try to place the burden on the wrong party. Hijiri 88 (やや) 15:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:American-led intervention in Syria[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:American-led intervention in Syria. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

E cigs[edit]

I was a little surprised by the apparent emotional content ("You don't like outside opinions marked as such? Fine, but you still don't get to alter editors posts by placing them in another section.") of your edit summary.

I actually consider my comments to be "outside commentary" as I've only been involved in this discussion for about 24 hours, and even that was mainly completely non-controversial technical commentary up until the last 3 hours or so.

The problem here from my POV was that the commenter created a separate section with the goal of highlighting their own commentary over that of other participants in the discussion. If every new contributor to a discussion (I was one 3 hours ago) creates a new section to highlight their own comments, the discussion becomes very difficult to follow.

For example, Kim made asked me a question in the previous section, and in responding to it I had to decide whether to place my response in the same section as the question, where it would be seen by almost no one (since people look at the bottom of the thread for new discussion) or in a completely different section of the Talk page.

If you disagree with my decision, that's fine. And if you want to revert it that's fine too. But the judgmental commentary and the assumption of selfish/childish motives was not helpful nor kind. We have enough hostility and assumption of bad faith on that page already. Formerly 98 (talk) 03:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I meant and mean no hostility towards you but I (usually) do try to comment in a straight way that, IMO shouldn't be seen as "hostile" by good meaning editors. So yes, I disagree with your decision but made [the thread] a sub-section. I also disagree with you about "I was one 3 hours ago". You commented there before and even more recently than I did myself. What makes you think your comment could be considered an outside opinion? I wouldn't place myself in that category.
About "assumption of selfish/childish": You made an assumption there yourself, not me.
Also, "people" do look further than the bottom thread. Your assumption is a (pardon me) silly assumption. If true, we could set archive bot to remove all sections but the last in each article's talkpage. Right???TMCk (talk) 04:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alan Chambers (Exodus International)[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Alan Chambers (Exodus International). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Random message left on my page[edit]

I didn't quite get where you came across me and what you were accusing me of on my talk page? Care to elaborate? Also left me "wondering" :-) Asilah1981 (talk) 16:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Evacuation of East Prussia[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Evacuation of East Prussia. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Umbrella Movement[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Umbrella Movement. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mexicans of European descent[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mexicans of European descent. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Sowell[edit]

You recently objected to an edit which characterized Thomas Sowell as a social scientist. I don't have strong feelings about whether this is preferable to Economist, but the former is certainly not indefensible. See here for example: http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/thomas-sowell-on-the-economics-of-immigration/ Edit as you see fit, I won't revert again. 24.187.214.210 (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

He is firstly and mostly described as an economist, just as in his wiki entry. "Social scientist" is to be found quite rarely and thus shouldn't be used as "qualifier" (if one is used at all). Assuming you're user:MikeyLin(?), if you don't have strong feelings either way I'm wondering why you reverted 2 times to what looks to be your preferred version added by you a while back.TMCk (talk) 19:04, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
'He is firstly and mostly described as an economist.' True
'"Social scientist" is to be found quite rarely.' This isn't as obvious, I found more examples during my quick search.
'Assuming you're user:MikeyLin' I'm not. I reverted because I assumed my self that whoever thought Sowell's opinion of the subject was worth mentioned did so because of Sowell frequent comments on social issues. Viewing the edit history it seems the original text was entered without any career qualifier, so you may be correct that it isn't needed. 24.187.214.210 (talk) 17:32, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Israel[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Israel. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Poitras[edit]

Claim is widely spread now -- although in addition to using "accusations" I should have said Bruner said she sent him an email. I was fairly sure I avoided making a claim about her actions in Wikipedia's voice though. Cheers. Collect (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:No-go area[edit]

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:No-go area. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

About "Nazi concentration camps"[edit]

Hi, the "Konzlager" is mentioned in Liquid Modernity of Zygmunt Bauman. Is a contraction of Konzentrationslager. Check citation (reverted too) for more information. Keep in touch. :) --Webysther (talk) 05:19, 4 March 2015 (UTC) You are correct, it is a contraction that the Russians made. --Webysther (talk) 05:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Careful[edit]

Not a bad faith troll, just an inexperienced POV-pushing know-it-all. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Wiki inexperience has nothing to do with it. They passed the test.TMCk (talk) 21:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Billy Mackenzie[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Billy Mackenzie. Legobot (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

West Germany[edit]

Hi. When you reverted my edits and re-added "Westdeutschland" as an appropriate translation of the period of West Germany, you stated that "It was [referred to by that name] at the time", however, your provide no references for this. Even the German Wikipedia page for West Germany is called "History of the Federal Republic of Germany (until 1990)". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Mitchell 98 (talkcontribs) 04:07, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nick. There is also an Article "Westdeutschland" on German WP which is linked from the "History of the Federal Republic of Germany (until 1990)" page you mentioned. That should clarify the confusion interwiki links can bring at times.--TMCk (talk) 13:43, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2012 Delhi gang rape[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2012 Delhi gang rape. Legobot (talk) 00:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for chiming in on 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt. It's nice to see other editors getting involved in these Venezuela-related articles, which doesn't happen much.  Mbinebri  talk ← 19:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I try to stay out of it as much as possible. Nearly all (as far as I'm aware of) Venezuela related articles started to turn into an encyclopedic mess early 2014 when the hot-headed and involved came here for the wrong reason (just an example).--TMCk (talk) 19:48, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I wish I could stay out of it, but the seemingly anti-government intent of much recent editing keeps me involved, if only on principle. I knew zilch about Venezuela before all this. Now I feel like I know too much!  Mbinebri  talk ← 12:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
i also wish i could stay out of it. i do not enjoy doing this in the least. but i nonetheless i feel oligated to check in every once in awhile to see how much damage is being done to certain articles, and futilely seek to rectify the most egregious examples.--Tellectualin (talk) 14:58, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

@Mbinebri:"if only to principle". Considering your edits, I rightly can assume you're trying to hold up WP principles which Venezuela article are lacking of and in that case I unfortunately couldn't agree more. Some think that throwing enough mud is not only the proper way but don't see the red line where the mud doesn't stick anymore. Reminds me of US politics...! At some point the "mud" covers what is intended to "expose" while any additional ["mud"] is just covering the intent. That's a "backsplash", tho certain editors are not aware of it and their trustability is going down the drain and reflect the articles in question.--TMCk (talk) 21:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

@Tellectualin:You (unlike some others) disclosed your POV and yet you showed less of it than certain editors in that range of articles, considering your rare edits which don't involve plain mudslinging but removing what you consider (reasonable in part) to be such. One advice I'd like to give you down the road: Don't keep making the same mistake as others did so far (in part) and back-up your edits with independent sources as much as possible. I know there are less around in English but being on the other side of the "argument", I'd guess you can find or have access to such sources that could potentially improve Venezuela related articles.--TMCk (talk) 21:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Recent The Photographer edits[edit]

With recent edits of The Photographer, I just wanted to inform you that I am helping them begin to contribute on the English Wikipedia. They would like to make contributions to projects but they are more familiar with the Spanish Wikipedia which is sometimes less formal. I would like you to work with us and try to be as constructive as possible in the future.--ZiaLater (talk) 08:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:CIVIL[edit]

Please comment on Talk:University of Texas at Austin[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:University of Texas at Austin. Legobot (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

General Sanctions: Electronic Cigarettes[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to electronic cigarettes.
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.

SPACKlick (talk) 13:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

James O'Keefe article/The Daily Mail reliability[edit]

The link you gave me regarding the reliability of the Daily Mail was not correct. However, I searched and found this vigorous and robust debate regarding the use of The Daily Mail as a reliable source and that no decision was made to bar the use of The Daily Mail as a reliable source.

However, in deference to your concerns, I expanded the text and added this link, which I hope is sufficiently reliable. Yours, Quis separabit? 01:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

  • There are plenty of discussions about the Daily Mail on that board. The latest is still there. As for reliable sources for this incident, there are not many out there tho a view newer ones can be found.
    Followups, if any, please on the article's talk page where it belongs.--TMCk (talk) 01:54, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

::: I replied on the O'Keefe talk page about the April 1 edit, about which I remember nothing. I explained it there. At first I didn't realize you were the same editor asking me the question as the editor who challenged the Daily Mail. Maybe your signature is not the same as your username. Whatever. Anyway, I cannot offer a more constructive reply than the one I gave. I assure you I was not blatantly vandalizing a contentious article. I have been editing since 2005 -- and yes I am sure you will have checked my blocklog by now -- but I would have no reason for doing so. Quis separabit? 01:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Updated reply on O'Keefe talk page. I figured it out. Ignore preceding scored text which was just guesswork. Quis separabit? 01:59, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
It never happened.--TMCk (talk) 02:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hapa[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hapa. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Australians[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Australians. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

When to use the Fringe Theories tag[edit]

Hi, I notice you removed the Fringe Theories tag at Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot (BHUAP). Although I have done my best to clean up the page, I anticipate that it will eventually start to attract a lot of unsubstantiated material and fringe theories about BHUAP. Is that the best time to re-insert the tag? I would argue that this entire page has been created as the result of a fringe theory, as I cannot find any reliable Aviation industry source that will support the existence of the BHUAP, except perhaps as a concept. Cheers M Stone (talk) 05:29, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, The Magnificent Clean-keeper. 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.

Please comment on Talk:Soka Gakkai[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Soka Gakkai. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)