User talk:Tide rolls

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


Contents

Blanking[edit]

Thanks for your recent inquiry:

Blanking - I've requested an explanation for your removal of the IP header. Discussion does not take place in edit summaries. Could you point me to said discussion? Tiderolls 04:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

With all of the nonsense being done in violation to my article, I removed it without a direct response to you. For that, I apologize and did not mean to disrepect you in anyway, even though I'm being disrepected and my patience is wearing off. However, this has already been discussed and resolved. Therefore, I've decided to move on and be productive after originally considering to "retire" from the IP to avoid these individuals. A message I left and received on another talk page, gave me a change of heart for the time being, therefoe returned to make another attempt (a "fresh start" if you will). My messages to past users on my talk page is in an effort to avoid them so there is no more conflict of interest as there has been. None of them slow down long enough to actually communicate with me like an adult, they just take it upon themself to vandalize my talk page and make ASSumptions. I'm not here for them. And I am not working on "their" articles they watch, so there is no need to be in contact with me anymore. Their egos/pride about being on my talk page is what this is all about. The only difference from the names on their talk pages they have, is the text/words between each. So when they see something "different", they feel threatened and afraid over the "unknown". It's all rubbish. Now, about the IP, that notice is already at the bottom of all talk pages. I am also the only one editing from it, and the "Shared IP" tag is actually incorrect. Therefore it has no place on the/my talk page. It has also been discussed and resolved/dropped more than once, so I do not want to "fight" about it anymore, with all due respect. It is not hurting anyone not having it off. Should I retire, or it become "public", I will be the first to notify someone or post it on my talk page like a responsible editor. But I will not continue to explain myself. People find this as disruptive when I stand up for myself or claim I have an attitude, but it's just me trying to move forward and avoid the drama. Not only that, they are causing problems such as Wikihounding and making up "hit list" rules that don't exist nor that I'm even violating. I think they have a guilty conscience and their motive is to seek some kind of revenge to silence me when I'm not the one doing anything wrong. Perhaps I'm playing devil's advocate for all the IPs who get wrongly mistreated, but they should back off and spend their time doing something productive, not ganging up on me. If you can eventually look through the clouded judgments and smoke screens, you'll see they are actually the ones in violation. In fact, every time I've been right, and they didn't "ruin me" or get their way on the noticeboard or my talk page, they have only gotten more angry. They are adding to the fuel, they are the one trying to make invalid points. Perhaps human nature, but my motive isn't to be right, it's to be civil and ignore them (disengage). They are making that difficult to do. These are my contentions of course, so I trust you won't assume I'm casting blame or "attacking" anyone specifically. It's just been my observation and experiences. At any rate, best of wishes and take care! :) Happy editing... P.S. Oh, by the way, the fact I've killed these editors with kindness before is also driving them to be inappropriate as well I believe. This "hit list" is all in their heads. It's a fabrication. Good day/night! FYI: I don't have the topic handy, but the prior discussion is on the most recent/current noticeboard topic, I think, and the one recently closed. I don't care to return to it since I'm trying to be productive on here and not cause problems or be "right" and "win" like they are. I've moved on, I think they should too. All this negative attention is doing on one any good. So much for "good faith". 99.129.112.89 (talk) 05:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

This may offer you useful advice WP:Oh I say, what are you doing? Come down from there at once! Really, you're making a frightful exhibition of yourself. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:30, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • 99*, you're wrong on so many counts (and, ever so deftly, avoided answering my request). Be that as it may, I don't tilt windmills so we probably will not cross paths again. Regards Tiderolls 05:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
This is the person who "resolved" that, he came in saying we or I was an IP bully (not sure if it was a blanket statement) [[1]] We are trying to have a discussion here [[2]] regarding this. I am still considering clarifying whether WP:BLANKING should still show shared IP as something an IP can't remove because that's a small part of why we're here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Notifications box replacement prototypes released[edit]

Hey Tide rolls; Kaldari has finished scripting a set of potential replacements available to test and give feedback on. Please go to this thread for more detail on how to enable them. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Tacky[edit]

If you have something of genuine use to say, please do so. Otherwise you should play by your own rules and assume good faith, and avoid personal attacks. I understand that you and I may have different opinions on a certain situation; however, I find it unacceptable that you ignore unfounded allegations against me. Smurfmeister (talk) 23:58, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

AGF is a two way street, Smufmeister. Tiderolls 00:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Agreed - but when someone's first act is to call you abusive, it makes it that bit harder. Smurfmeister (talk) 00:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Please, please learn how to indent. Whenever you sit down to your keyboard think of our readers. They don't care who thinks who is "abusive" or a "cockhead". They want reliable, informative articles. Tiderolls 00:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Stop making unnecessary digs. What makes you think 'our readers' care whether a post is intended or not? Also please stop ignoring the point. I DO care about being described as abusive - I've done nothing to deserve it, and whether it matters or not to other readers is irrelevant. They can worry about accusations made against them, not against me. Smurfmeister (talk) 00:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Right now your behavior is the point. If you cannot see that I'm trying to help you perhaps you should move on. You're not convincing me of anything other than your intransigence. Tiderolls 00:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
BEHAVIOUR. Is it really that difficult a word? Smurfmeister (talk) 00:14, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Nope. And neither is behavior. Tiderolls 00:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow. Just wow. You fail to understand that articles are separate from talk threads, and that civility builds accuracy because of the collaborative medium of Wikipedia. Great judgement you have there. - 110.20.126.106 (talk) 00:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Ashwani Kumar[edit]

Living person was sacked not he resigned voluntarily. Made this only change.

http://www.timesnow.tv/Debate-Bansal-Ashwani-sacked---1/videoshow/4427176.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.9.76 (talk) 00:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Your source says "forced to resign", not "sacked". This may be an employment of euphemism by those in a position of power, but that would be a subject of discussion for the article's talk page. My advice would be for you to start a new section on the article's talk page to determine what language is supported by consensus. Regards Tiderolls 00:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Topchef5050[edit]

Help! We've got one of those annoying editors who insists on making unexplained changes to the various Top Chef articles with no edit summaries. Most of them are manageable, but the edits for Top Chef (season 4) are out of hand. The show does not rank order the runners up (no first or second RU), and we usually list them alphabetically. The editor persists in ranking one chef over the other, then adds a note in text that he is the first runner up and not to edit her changes. Meanwhile, her edits include removal of appropriate links and restoration of spelling errors, along with the POV rankings. They're at 3RR now, so I'm going to go tag their talk page, but would you mind having a look and maybe adding a bit of gravitas to the situation? (Caveat: I recognize I haven't handled this the best way I could have, but an earlier request for help got no response, and I got frustrated. If I have to take a block for it, so be it.) Thanks! --Drmargi (talk) 00:32, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Drmargi. Topchef5050 has been editing disruptively for some time and I do not think they will stop. Consequently, I have temporarily blocked that account. Thanks for your attention to these pages. Tiderolls 01:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Tide. I get so weary of editors like this one who follow the elimination shows, devote themselves to the tables but nothing else, and ignore policy over and over. You got more response in a few minutes than I've gotten in months. Am I OK to restore the verifiable version? --Drmargi (talk) 05:31, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll leave the editorial decision to you. I would caution against the appearance of edit warring, though. Is there no Wikiproject associated with the article you could approach for help? That would be my advice, for what it's worth. Tiderolls 05:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I didn't think of that. Let me look into it. Thanks!--Drmargi (talk) 14:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The block is over, and she's back at it. She seems to have unilaterally declared first and second runners up, something the show doesn't do, based on her interpretation of the judges' (highly edited) comments. Talk? IN the article, but not on the talk page. I am getting some minimal response on her talk page, but nothing getting us much of anywhere. Sigh! --Drmargi (talk) 03:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Another one bites the dust. What is it about these elimination shows that they attract this particular sort of editor? --Drmargi (talk) 17:09, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps they do not experience the disorientation I do when the words "reality" and "television" are used in conjunction. Tiderolls 18:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Wei Huang[edit]

On the page Wei Huang, the last name (Huang) is supposed to be before the last name (Wei) because this is the proper way for a name to be written if it is in Chinese. Instead of Wei Huang, the name of the person should be Huang Wei.

I need to know if I have permission to make a change and if I'm given permission, how can I change it?

User:AFCShandong (talk) 20:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, AFCShandong. You do not need permission to edit articles on Wikipedia. Discussion on the article's talk page can provide some help, though. Wikipedia policy requires proper sourcing (see WP:Identifying reliable sources and WP:Citations). Additionally, you should acquaint yourself with the guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) and check out Wikipedia:Requested moves. If these links are not helpful, message me here with your specific concerns and I will try to help where I can. Regards Tiderolls 21:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to look at edits on IQ reference chart[edit]

I see the article IQ reference chart has been tagged for expert review since October 2012. As part of a process of drafting a revision of that article in my user sandbox, I am contacting all Wikipedians who have edited that article since early 2009 for whom I can find a user talk page.

I have read all the diffs of all the edits committed to the article since the beginning of 2009 (since before I started editing Wikipedia). I see the great majority of edits over that span have been vandalism (often by I.P. editors, presumably teenagers, inserting the names of their classmates in charts of IQ classifications) and reversions of vandalism (sometimes automatically by ClueBot). Just a few editors have referred to and cited published reliable sources on the topic of IQ classification. It is dismaying to see that the number of reliable sources cited in the article has actually declined over the last few years. To help the process of finding reliable sources for articles on psychology and related topics, I have been compiling a source list on intelligence since I became a Wikipedian in 2010, and I invite you to make use of those sources as you revise articles on Wikipedia and to suggest further sources for the source on the talk pages of the source list and its subpages. Because the IQ reference chart article has been tagged as needing expert attention for more than half a year, I have opened discussion on the article's talk page about how to fix the article, and I welcome you to join the discussion. The draft I have in my user sandbox shows my current thinking about a reader-friendly, well sourced way to update and improve the article. I invite your comments and especially your suggestions of reliable sources as the updating process proceeds. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 20:32, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Imorthodox23[edit]

User:Imorthodox23, who you blocked, seems to have a serious quacker in User:176.73.158.209. Same edits just to put Georgia and associated topics on top of lists, eg [3]. CMD (talk) 02:14, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your attention to this matter, CMD. See ya 'round Tiderolls 08:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

New one[edit]

User:Spetty218. Thought it looked similar, and another user made the same observation. CMD (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, CMD. Tiderolls 21:14, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Schoolguy236. I can't figure out what the motivation is. CMD (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Eventually they'll get bored. Tiderolls 18:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
User:94.43.191.88 as well. CMD (talk) 17:43, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
That one hasn't edited for a couple of hours; if they start up again I will block. Thanks, CMD Tiderolls 18:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Found a really old one, User:Nera456. See [4][5][6][7]. They've been suspected before, so I don't know why they're still kicking around. Did a CU I can't find turn up negative or something? CMD (talk) 18:32, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, CMD. That one's not as clear cut for me to act upon. If a CU was run there's no record on the archived SPI page. I think it would be best to bring more eyes on this one to make sure we don't chomp on an innocent. If you need help with the SPI, let me know. See ya Tiderolls 18:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate it wasn't as clearcut. It surprised me too when I saw it, and it took a bit of looking through the contributions to convince me. I'll open the SPI, feel free to comment or not. CMD (talk) 19:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Made one. Always worries me SPIs, that they'll provide ideas on how to avoid detection. Ah well. CMD (talk) 19:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

There's been no action on this in over a week. Have Nera456's continued edits made the situation more clear cut? CMD (talk) 12:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was kinda waiting on the SPI and hadn't looked at their contribs lately. Did you request a checkuser in that SPI? I'm at work presently but I can take a look when I get home. See ya Tiderolls 14:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Don't remember what I did in the initial filing, sorry. There's no immediate hurry, but it'd be nice not to have another week of edits to clean up. Til has also commented now. CMD (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

User:JGVR sock[edit]

Hi Tide rolls, I had filed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JGVR yesterday at about the same time you were blocking User:D12Blame. Not sure what to do now. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Voceditenore. I'd let the SPI run; a checkuser might find sleepers if they exist. Thanks for your help on this. Tiderolls 12:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Okey dokey. I must say I'm quite glad to find I wasn't the only one who smelled something fishy. :). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:38, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Xu Liang[edit]

On Xu Liang, I'm having problem with updating the career statistics template (for 2013 Shanghai Shenhua one). Do you know how to fix this?

User:AFCShandong (talk) 17:19, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Scots clans IP[edit]

On User talk:24.188.32.225: Template:Anonblock is clearly for an IP number (e.g. that of a school) shared by people; but I see no evidence that this particular IP number has recently been used by more than one person. I do understand that we all want to minimize the time we waste on him, but why not just the regular Template:Uw-ablock, why a three-month vacation for (as far as I notice) no more than removing a comment illegitimately and ignoring a warning not to do this and instead removing the comment a second time, and why remove his own little farewell message (of course merely the latest of several) from his own talk page? -- Hoary (talk) 01:13, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

All valid points, Hoary; I think I considered them all before my action. Let's see. I saw the IP address was dynamic before I blocked and the template does refer to ISPs as well as other organizations. Also, while the IP address may have been used by others I saw that the highland edits had gone back months and the 24*'s recent exhibition of pointy and intransigent action demonstrated to me that a short term block would only mean we would have to revisit this situation again and again. Removing the IP's comment was just a matter of talk page housekeeping; my action was not meant as a statement that their comment was prohibited. If they had reinstated the edit I would not have acted upon it; indeed, they saw fit to portray me in a rather hermaphroditic light and I had no intention of removing that comment. Having said all that, if you feel that any changes are warranted, please proceed. I do not feel that my actions are carved in stone and are always subject to discussion and/or alteration. If I've missed something or you would like further clarification you know where to find me. Regards Tiderolls 01:39, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Bangalore Tamils[edit]

Hi Tide rolls, i am facing the Editing interruption problem mainly from the user Abhishek191288 on 4th june 2013 onwards. For glance please see the below information Bangalore article editing interuption 4 of this month.please see here...click

  1. Bangalore article editing interuption 12 of this month ending by the user Abhishek191288 revert

please see the difference...click here.

  1. Domlur Chokkanathaswamy temple article editing interuption 12 of this month

after he reverted the banglore atricle he placed pov template in Domlur Chokkanathaswamy temple. please see the diference...click here .see the present diff...click here

  1. Bangalore Tamil article editing interuption 12 of this month

the same day he placed pov tag on Bangalore tamil...click here.please see the diference see the present diff...click here

  1. He removed biggest functioning hindu temple called Srirangam temple from south india article.please see...

12 June 2013 of user Abhishek191288 edits only on me.plz click .the above three are interrupted on the same day with in hour diff only.The main point which i noted frm the user Abhishek191288.i dont want to say.but it seems like that .the user Abhishek191288 mentioned that he feels proud to be kannadiga.so some ethinic mentality will be a chance.see his user page...User:Abhishek191288 plz click here. see contribution mainly south india,with the above three.which is crystal clear example he has some little ethnicity .it seems.


and the main reason is he mention in more than a time i am pushing Tamil ethnicity.i never use those words at first....click here but he used those words his talk page and and he said the same thing with another user.

he placed pov tag and he called other users.see here...click here.

At present my page banglore tamil redirected to banglore page.how the redirection will applicale there.while he placing POV template he should provide the reason Pov tag also in the talk page of the particular article.i mentioned all time he never did.see here...click here.but he keep on placed the tag incompletely.see the other user domination...click here.finally he removed my article and closed it .redirect to banglore.the same thing they are doing my ...Domlur_Chokkanathaswamy_temple article.finally one user merging with Domlur and my article.i hope they will redirect that article to domlur .both article has hopeful content.but i could not expect this thig

My point is why the user placing pov tag and other like citation needed tag in all my article and edits Apart from the above in the same day with in a hour ,after i added the oldest temple info in the banglore article,then he removed the file . after he continuously doing with the help of other two users..i know the pain what i spent to gather the info.i dont want to say more than that..but i need the support from the senior editors.i m helpless now.that is my feel to say.Thank you.Eshwar.omTalk tome 17:57, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

You would be able to answer your concerns by engaging the other editors on the article talk page (or their user talk pages, if necessary) as I suggested in my initial message. It is my opinion that you would be well served by listening and giving due consideration to editors that are experienced and active at that article. Regards Tiderolls 19:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Page Move[edit]

In that case, first, the page mover was posting nonsense in claiming that the pages were created by IP addresses, and, second, the page mover was failing to use the standard options. (I remember the standard options because I corrected the case of a copy-edit article this week.) Thank you. As was said, it is a disruptive page-moving editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

left message[edit]

You left a message that you said I posted about fuel taxes. I haven't contributed to any part of this site. I use this site as strictly reference. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.180.91 (talk) 23:46, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

IP addresses are often shared over time. Click here to see the edit to which the message referred. Tiderolls

Individual page[edit]

Been a while but I will answer your comment in my talk page now that I have seen it.

One would presume you would send the same message to Sminthopsis84 as mathematically he/she has more reverts (the basis of your claim) and, unlike me, has no rationale or explanation given for them. In their Talk I do not see a warning. Both logically, by your stated motive and mathematically (by reverts) minimally it would demand equal treatment, not including in that reasoning my efforts of at least explanation which Sminthopsis84 did not provide in any way whatsoever. Since math, effort and explanation are satisfied by my case, yet you side completely by issuing no warning, warning me, and letting any edits stand carte blanch by minthopsis84 on top, the only thing left is you acted without standing within your stated reasons of action, logic, reasonableness, and/or personal/emotional bias.

Saying go to the Talk page is totally reasonable, I have no complaint; but, if you're going to demand it of one user and not the other and let all their edits stand without any revert warning as well, you acted with bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Telekenesis (talkcontribs) 05:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The other party was already on the article talk page. Tiderolls 10:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

NHL divisions[edit]

FYI, the NHL themselves are using those designations, so you may want to hold off on that reverting you're doing. [8] Echoedmyron (talk) 17:15, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I saw that. That ref says the designation is temporary so I'm thinking some discussion would be warranted before changes are made. Just my two cents. Tiderolls 17:17, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hyacinth[edit]

This is the first time I've found myself seriously considering a WP:CIR block against an admin.—Kww(talk) 04:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

At first I thought I was in desperate need of sleep, but they continue reinforcing my initial perception. Astonishing. Tiderolls 04:25, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Better to just ship it to ArbCom instead. --Rschen7754 04:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
And leave him free to break templates?—Kww(talk) 04:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
If it comes to that, I will be accused of involvement issues. If you decide to, I will be supportive.—Kww(talk) 04:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
The idea would be to request a desysop, even if by motion. --Rschen7754 04:40, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I think the next block, if necessary, should come from another admin, Kww. If Hyacinth continues what appears to me a disingenuous and perfunctory participation at AN/I, I will act. Tiderolls 04:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Wow. Tiderolls 04:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I didn't want to bring this up in AN/I, but I noticed that Hyacinth suffers from uncontrolled epilepsy as he states on his front page User:Hyacinth. Confusion and amnesia can result after a seizure and I noticed that his recent answers have seemed a bit confused and unaware of the situation.--I am One of Many (talk) 06:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I saw that as well, IaOoM. It does impact my decision making process. That's one of the reasons I'm waiting on more input into the discussion before I act. Hyacinth appears to have stopped editing so I'm in no particular rush. Tiderolls 06:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Though if this is a regular occurrence for him, adminship may not be a good fit. --Rschen7754 06:45, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
In my opinion, if he returns and is the same way, I'd suggest initiating a case... there's an established pattern of misuse of tools and not answering to them. --Rschen7754 08:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Removing administrative privileges from someone for having a disability is clear discrimination. Hyacinth (talk) 22:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

No, it's for not responding to criticism related to your abuse of tools, which you still have not responded to. --Rschen7754 23:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm not defending myself. If it was about my lack of response epilepsy shouldn't have come up. Racial slurs against an admin don't, or shouldn't, come up in a discussion of an admin. Neither should honesty be punished. Hyacinth (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Pronouns[edit]

Using inappropriate pronouns, especially after being informed what the correct ones are, is incivility. As someone who's role and goal it is to encourage civility, you may wish to address people with respect rather than as objects. Hyacinth (talk) 04:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I do not treat people as objects, which you would know if you knew me. Tiderolls 05:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Help me, and excuse me, i want only to help[edit]

Hello!

Excuse me, for my interrupting, i know i'm not very good in English, but I want to help how I can, to describe Romanian celebrities and their life/biography, a administrator Schmidt, or something like that promise me, that will help me. Please help me to add a new photo for Delia page, review my description , and improve my English or help me to find a person who can help me. Consiliul, 15.07.2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Consiliul (talkcontribs) 14:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Cosplay photos[edit]

Is Wikipedia a place for cosplay photos?[9] If not, could you inform user Canoe1967[10] about that?-68.75.18.106 (talk) 07:05, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I have no particular editorial opinion on the use of those images and, as I see no policy problems, my "instruction" as an administrator seems unwarranted. If I've missed something please let me know. Regards Tiderolls 10:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Spacing[edit]

It is a rule here on Wikipedia not to put in spacing? Because some pages here have run on sentences and the article is not readable. That seems to be a problem on the Alyx Vance page[11] 99.159.251.163 (talk) 12:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

There is no rule as such; however, the guideline found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style explains the framework within editors are expected to work. This guideline serves as a foundation upon which, through disucssion and collabration, editorial decisions are taken. Regards Tiderolls 13:54, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

RevDel AnonymousDom[edit]

Thank you for blocking AnonymousDom (talk · contribs · block log).

Common vandalism is usually reverted and left in the page history. However, do you think you could examine AnonymousDom's edits to National Security Agency to see whether or not they meet the criteria for revision deletion? I thought they were particularly disruptive, and they were live for quite some time (40 minutes first instance, 25 minutes second instance).

Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 19:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Michael. Those contribs certainly demonstrate "little or no relevance or merit" to me, but I've been concerned by the over-broad scope of Purely disruptive material for some time now. My personal requirement for RevDel concentrates on BLP problems and copyvios. I'm not saying you don't have a point, it's just my preference to deny attention to those that choose WP as forum for their rants. I have no problem with you seeking out more admin opinion on this particular instance, but I advise you to be as discrete as possible so as to avoid granting the perpetrator the audience they seek. See ya 'round Tiderolls 20:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

List_of_football_clubs_in_England_by_major_honours_won[edit]

I'd say IP is right. The article text itself, as well as its very first ref don't mention the super-cups at all or reports them as major titles. -17:13, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Wiki page vandalism[edit]

Even though it is back in 2010 when I supposedly did these edits, haven't seen the message until now, and while it is very likely my IP has changed a few times, those edits were not me. No need to respond to this as it will probably be another user on this IP that gets it as the internet provider apparently cycles through them. 69.183.26.128 (talk) 20:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

wat[edit]

no i didnt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.210.207 (talk) 14:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

I want to add the coordinates top the page for Kuala Namu International Airport. That page is semi protected, so I can't edit it. How do I get the airport coordinates on that page? Günther Eichhorn 22:03, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Günther Eichhorn. I found the following instructions. Message me again if you require further help
  • To request an edit to a semi-protected page, place this template on the corresponding talk page by writing {{edit semi-protected}}. The template should be accompanied by a clear and specific description of the requested change. For any change that might be controversial, obtain consensus before placing the template. See Wikipedia:Edit requests for further guidance.
Regards. Tiderolls 23:06, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Benedictdilton[edit]

I notice you have just blocked User:Benedictdilton for abusing multiple accounts. I notice that a few minutes after the block, User:Podimaladusthill made very similar edits to the K. P. Yohannan article. StAnselm (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it was the edits by Podimaladusthill (talk · contribs) that prompted the block. Tiderolls 04:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Why was I blocked when I had done nothing wrong.[edit]

Hi, I was recently blocked by you for abusing multiple accounts. I am using only this account in wikipedia. Can you please let me know what led you to block me so that I can avoid such situation in the future. Benedictdilton (talk) 03:09, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe you are already familiar with the process and its consequences. Simply cease editing from other accounts and/or "soliciting other people to come to Wikipedia in order to influence the editorial process". Tiderolls 03:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
The account we are talking here is not mine and I don't ask any body to do any edits. how can I prove my innocence here. Benedictdilton (talk) 12:33, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I do not understand exactly what you mean by prove your innocence. If you are referring to the recent situation that resulted in your block, your best course of action is to pursue your edting future without breaking Wikipedia policy. Proving your innocence would be a waste of time for several reasons but mainly because what's past is past. Tiderolls 13:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
That means I can get blocked again if someone else had done some thing wrong. The edit I have done I know is a sensational issue. The time a senior editor reverted my edit I asked him politely on his talk page why my edit was reverted. I don't try to indulge in edit war or any thing like that. Not even tried to revert what he had done. I was waiting for his response and he requested you to block me. After the first incident when I was warned for the same issue a few months back I am extremely careful with my actions on wikipedia. I am under going an adoptee course as well. My request to you is - Is there a way I can prove I have not used any other account or like requesting for checking how the other person becomes a puppet of me.Benedictdilton (talk) 14:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Who has adopted you? Tiderolls 14:43, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I Am an adoptee under Go Phightins here. Thats why I am feeling embarassed on getting a block. I am telling you sir I had done nothing wrong. I dont do the second edit nor did I ask any one to do it. Thats why I want to recheck the issue and block the ip address from which the second edit was made if possible. Once a senior editor reverted my edit I felt some thing was wrong and because of that I asked the senior editor on his talk page why my edit was reverted. Benedictdilton (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Hi Tide rolls, I am not sure if we have ever met, but I am Go Phightins!. Feel free to call me Ben, my real name. Anyway, would you mind (via email if you prefer) explaining to me what happened? I haven't been around much lately and seem to have missed something. Thanks, Go Phightins! 15:41, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi,Go Phightins. For background you can check the revision history here. If you have further questions, let me know. Tiderolls 15:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Sigh. Yeah, that would be quite the coincidence and behaviorally, I would assume sockpuppetry. A checkuser was not run, correct? Go Phightins! 16:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I didn't request a checkuser as my reading of the situation tended more toward meat than sock. Tiderolls 17:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Cosplay[edit]

Are cosplay photos of characters allowed at wiki?[12] Or why is this user allowed to put up these photos?[13]108.82.5.85 (talk)

I'm not an image expert so I would ask you, are they not allowed? Also, it'd be helpful if you'd log in before you respond. Regards Tiderolls 15:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Roll tide[edit]

W = W, right? Drmies (talk) 03:03, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Of course. Tiderolls 04:48, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Concept (Rapper)[edit]

Hi may I politely ask why you deleted my article on a well known rapper/friend around the Boston area? Thank You Johnhoward217 (talk) 02:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about this, but on my talk page, I gave you two good policies about why your article got deleted. buffbills7701 02:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Your article did not, per WP:42 or WP:BAND, prove why the person was notable. Thus the article was speedily deleted from Wikipedia. ~Charmlet -talk- 02:30, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
(EC)The claim of notability was not credible to me and the individual was not mentioned on the website of the organization with which you stated they had an affiliation. You should acquaint yourself with the appropriate guideline (WP:MUSBIO) and since you mention "friend", read WP:COI. Tiderolls 02:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Roll tide[edit]

W = W, right? Drmies (talk) 00:48, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Of course. If the W was accomplished against a top ten team, an inter-divisional rival and a team that had won the last meeting, then one could make a case for the W having more significance. However, this is would be a subjective view based on intangibles and overall irrelevancies. RMFT Tiderolls 00:58, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Opinion[edit]

i think you did make a mistake im sorry to say! by the way your page is very interesting and i love it!!! But my recent change to prophet is actually true information so.... i would appreciate it if you put it back up — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.73.238 (talk) 14:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

plllllllleeeeaaaaaassssse put it back up why dont you think it is right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.73.238 (talk) 14:07, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

plllllllleeeeaaaaaassssse put it back up why dont you think it is right?

No need to be sorry about a difference of opinion. Your changes did not help; I will not reinstate them. If you do, make sure the content is constructive and sourced. Also, please attempt to follow talk page guidelines. Tiderolls 14:09, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I actually think you are being so rude!

and no! i do not love your page

ok so maybe the thing about the fact that prophets poo alot isn't true but i did put something helpful on afterwards! it was alot of information and within 10 seconds you had deleted it! if you don't think its helpful i'm fine with that but actually thats exactly what i wrote in my essay and my teacher loved it, if you can't see the difference between fake information and real information then really you shouldn't be deleting stuff you are not sure if it's true or not. I can understand about the poo thing but seriously?! My most recent one was real information! Please make sure you actually know if it's right or not because other wise it really isn't fair! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.73.238 (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

ok fine but you really need to be aware that some stuff is real and not just a stupid comment... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.73.238 (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC) I just got another message saying you recently undid some of my contributions!!!! i only said " a prophet was a man or a woman who was chosen by god to be his messenger!" i cant believe you deleted that I think you just have an urge to delete anything i do

I've relocated your post to a section that makes sense. If you want me to continue this discussion, you will have to learn how to correctly use talk pages. See WP:Talk page guidelines. Tiderolls 16:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Stephen Ireland Vandalism[edit]

On The Page Of Stephen Ireland You Wrote "Fuk Off" For A Reason Which I Cannot See. It is Clear Vandalism. Please Do Not Do Anything Similar Elsewhere. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maarlon (talkcontribs) 15:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Maarlon. Actually, I removed the edit you reference. I'm an administrator on this site; I'm fairly well-versed on the definition of vandalism. It would probably be best if you make sure of the targets for your warnings in future. And sign your posts. Tiderolls 15:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Explanation[edit]

I was only correcting a geographical mistake. Poitiers is the capital/chief-town of Poitou , a present French region, before the French revolution, it was also a "province". Perigord is a different province, around 200 km south of Poitiers. Poitou is not adjacent to Perigord. Therefore i was correcting a geographical mistake, not your article. Sorry I was not trying to steal your authorship. I am a French national and I was a pupil in Poitiers. Cordially

Alaarm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaarm (talkcontribs) 16:15, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I see no contribution from your account to any page but this one and your message contains no diff for the edit. I'm sorry, but without some direction I have no idea what you're talking about. You do, however, need to acquaint yourself with WP:Verifiability and WP:Identifying reliable sources. One's familiarity with a subject does not directly impact the reliability of their edit(s). Tiderolls 16:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request[edit]

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Tiderolls

  • I tried to send the request but received a database error message. I'm leaving this message here in the event some malformed request was received. Tiderolls 13:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Opinion on deletion[edit]

Hi Tide rolls. I seem to recall that one of your areas of expertise/ activity is deletions. I am somewhat disillusioned with the WP, more and more pages are controlled by 'groups' who gang up on anyone with a dissenting view. Worst of all, you only find out after innocently chaging something and then all hell breaks loose. Then you read the page history and discover that the same group of people have resisted that specific change numerous times. Anyway, I recently proposed for deletion a complete unknown BUT an anti-Castro/ anti-Cuba person, and within minutes I was surrounded by opposing the deletion. He the same guy was pro-Castro/ pro-Cuba, the page would have been gone within minutes. Enough getting it off my chest, and my apologies. So, to the point: I came across this guy Abdullah Ayasrah and I really feel that it has no merit. But before expending any further energy and time, am I wrong? Do you think it has merit? Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:50, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Gabriel. Sorry to hear that you've been stressed. I know it is easy for me to write the words, but you should never look at AfD as an "us against them" arena. I know the process can deteriorate into a messy struggle but its ideal function is for editors to exhange ideas about a subject so that the encyclopedia can be improved. If you can keep focus on this goal it may help you avoid stress causing over-investment. Just make your case and be prepaired to answer any inquires; you needn't worry about addressing every point raised by those that do not share your view. If, in the future, you feel set upon by a group of editors, please come to me so that I may observe and offer any guidance that I can. As to your current case, Abdullah Ayasrah, the subject looks borderline notable to me. The article smacks a bit of promotion and could use more references, but this is a perfect example a subject that could use more input into the decision. That should be the goal of any AfD case; bringing more eyes and minds to an article to determine if the subject needs improvement or it doesn't meet policy or guidelnes. See ya 'round Tiderolls 13:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Tide rolls. Thanks for your reply. A a really great thank you for your words on my unburdening - I wasn't expecting that. It is a welcome change. Thank you. I'll take that as a sign that I should just let go, get up right away and go a good walk outside - spring is here in my neck of the woods and I haven't set a foot outdoors for months. Thanks. If ever in South Africa, do look me up. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:54, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism, IP users and Blocking[edit]

Hi noticed that you blocked a IP user 96.38.31.82, Thank you for doing that, Several IP's including the one that i mentioned have been removing and Vandalizing WBIR-TV and WTNZ-TV's pages adding Lies, chnaging peoples last names, removing anchors and adding other people who were just filling-in for the anchors. Is there a way to keep IP's from editing these articles? ACase0000 (talk) 04:33, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, ACase0000. The articles can be semi-protected but I think the articles are being watched sufficiently at the moment. If the problem is persistent then the situation can be reviewed. You should be aware that editors cannot be told not to edit articles by individuals. They can be warned regarding their editing against policy and Wikipedia's guidelines but only the community can issue article and/or topic bans. Thanks for all your help with these articles. Tiderolls 11:59, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your help as well, and you are welcome. ACase0000 (talk) 14:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Possible incoming edit war - Clan Gregor article[edit]

Hi there Tide rolls, some months back you helped with an edit war situation, mainly regarding the Clan Davidson article, which resulted in an IP user (User talk:24.188.32.225) being blocked and banned for vandalism. I fear another similar situation will arise with another Scottish clan article, this time Clan Gregor. If you check the article history, prior to the 28th Septmeber 2013, the article contained absolutley masses of unsourced information. The article had also been tagged since March 2013 as having a lack of sources/inline citations. There were some website sources that no longer worked but I'd say 90% of the article, which was quite large, was unsourced. Bearing in mind that unsourced information can be removed from Wikipeida, I re-wrote much of the article with complete inline/citations. However any existing well sourced information I left alone and did not remove. The article was brought up to a good stnadard with all the information sourced. Since then another IP user, (User talk:98.148.29.143) has come along and reverted the entire article back to its unsourced state - removing all the sourced information - without discussion. Wikipedia rules state that you should discuss before removing sourced information. I do not want to get into an edit war with IP user but at the same time I believe I have edited in accordance with the rules of Wikipedia, as explained, and that the IP user has not. Any help much appreciated. QuintusPetillius (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Benedict Cumberbatch[edit]

Dear Tide Rolls,

I have something to add to Benedict Cumberbatch's page. Under theatre, it says that it is unknown what his character was in The Children's Monologue. His character was the Shepard. ref: http://www.benedictcumberbatch.co.uk/biography/ Thank you for taking consideration.

Sincerely, Kayla — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaylaTheKat (talkcontribs) 02:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin[edit]

Hi. Since you contributed to the discussion resulting in the ban of Wikiexperts, you may want to consider the CEO's appeal at Wikipedia:AN#Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, Anthonycole. Tiderolls 18:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Glc72[edit]

I am an involved party, so take it with a grain of salt, but I can confirm the user is considering legal threats. A translation of the relevant comment is: "Please, I am already bearing the received offense. What I decide to do in the future on the legal side will depend on my mood. Another thing, for now there is (in case is needed) only the Lei [a grammatically formal way of addressing people]. Let's keep the necessary distances". You can ping a neutral Italian-speaking editor to confirm. I honestly apologized to him, repeatedly (I don't want to cause distress to anyone): but it seems this has enraged the user even more. I was considering going to AN/I since, vague legal threats apart, the editor is not really constructive in my opinion, but let me know what you think. Thanks for your interest Face-smile.svg. --cyclopiaspeak! 13:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see that while I wrote my comment you blocked him already. Well, hope this helps. Thanks. --cyclopiaspeak! 13:26, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I thought the machine translation was dependable. I was hoping more that Glc72 would rethink their position and simply retract their threat. I thought you made your case well regarding how you referred to the edit(s) and I admire you for offering your apology. Thanks for coming here to explain. Tiderolls 13:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
    • No, thank you. Such a frivolous threat wouldn't fly in any court, but it is always annoying to deal with this kind of attitude. --cyclopiaspeak! 13:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Ner[edit]

vous. Don't like playing LSU. Just as I'm copyediting your talk page (!) LSU scores. Drmies (talk) 02:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll have to admit I had my doubts as well, professor. I came to terms with the fact that this season's version of the Tide is not the juggernaut we've witnessed in the recent past. However, they find a way to win and that's fine with me. Here's hoping there's no post-LSU lack of focus or intensity. Roll Tide Tiderolls 12:12, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, a way to win. What a running game, even without a bruiser. Have we faked a punt since 1995? I don't remember.

I don't know, Tide; perhaps a more challenging schedule early on would have juggernauted us some more. Then again, we might not be unbeaten now. Moving right along: Auburn is looking good... Drmies (talk) 14:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Dude, your talk page is boring. I've already had to archive mine since I posted here. This game is not a blowout. If we lose, which we won't, there is no way I'm getting out of running for ArbCom--stupid drunk bet, and I wasn't even drunk. Anyway, I think we can get 20 more points in this last quarter. But holy moly, that Auburn game, that was something. Drmies (talk) 03:29, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Win = win. Drmies (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Maybe not for the BCS, professor. However, if we can win out, we should be able to remain included in any championship conversation. Roll tide Tiderolls 07:14, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Re:[edit]

Probably best to reply to the thread directly. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Except that I had nothing to contribute to the thread; thanks for the suggestion, though. Tiderolls 19:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
That edit nearly brings you to 100 for a rolling calendar month. Thanks for your valuable time. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Roll Tide[edit]

So far so good. Wait--it was better a minute ago.

Sandlot offense is tough to stop, professor. We just have to hope that fundamentals and discipline will win out at the end of the day. Roll Tide Tiderolls 22:17, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
You're right, of course. DYK I'm in New Orleans right now?
I did not know that. A good place to celebrate a Western Division championship :) Tiderolls 22:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Tie game! How're y'all feeling? :) Writ Keeper  00:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC) wait no, a field goal attempt! Gutsy call; I would've hail-maried it. Writ Keeper  00:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
wait WHAT Writ Keeper  00:25, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, yeah.
  • Apologies, I was AFK. Thankfully, I'm prevented from expounding by the TPGs. Now I will able to concentrate on other things, at least until next fall. Tiderolls 06:53, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Take it easy Tide. Good seeing you, even if briefly. Drmies (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

RE: Freestyle BMX[edit]

i recently edited history of freestyle bmx and you declined it, DSAB is a very important part of bmx, if you google DSAB, it should come up with a description of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.160.115 (talk) 20:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I did and I disagree. Tiderolls 01:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedian in community notice[edit]

Dear Tide rolls

As a Wikipedian interested in African subjects and specifically Uganda, we thought you might be interested in the following opportunity.

WikiAfrica is looking for a Wikipedian in Community from Uganda to play a pivotal role in its Kumusha Takes Wiki project. This might be a position that you would consider. Or it could be the perfect opportunity for someone you know from this country, please spread the word! For more details, please look at this page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/call_for_wir_en/

If you have any questions about the above, please contact isla on isla [at] wikiafrica [dot] net : Isla Haddow (talk)

Malicious vandal[edit]

58.7.42.247 is a real piece of work. Can you block him before he does more harm? Softlavender (talk) 23:26, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Softlavender. It looks like the IP had stopped before I saw your message. Thanks for your help in undoing the damage. If they should continue you can always report them at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Regards Tiderolls 02:14, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi again TR. I'm not 100% convinced they have stopped. Is there any way for you to "watch" their contributions? I can check a few times for the next couple of days, but after that it's too much trouble. I'm wondering if an admin can track contributions of a specific IP with no trouble. If so, can you do so? Anyway, thanks for being there. Softlavender (talk) 03:01, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Gun (video game)[edit]

User Silver Wolf Voki[14] is not providing a source link to the Gun video game page about a Sequel.[15] The link just says Four oh four! This is not the page you are looking for"[16] but this user just keep putting it back.108.82.5.224 (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand the 1937 Grand Prix season. The flagicon before the "Winning drivers" is Nazi Germany flag, but the falgicon before the race "Name" is Weimar Republic flag for the "German Grand Prix".

Ren Woods[edit]

The actresses name is Renn Woods not Ren Woods. The correct name is used throughout her bio. It should be corrected for search purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.179.36.126 (talk) 17:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the notable person policy. I refer to a restranteur who established the Glen in 1988 and has made over 20 appearances on CTV Ottawa Morning, ottawa citizen, ottawa sun, the Bear radio and Kanata courier. KInd regards, Brian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.25.10 (talk) 03:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh hell[edit]

Ah well. Drmies (talk) 05:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Yep. Tiderolls 05:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I did drink an amazingly delicious beer by Evil Twin Brewing. But then I had to delve into a topic ban issue where no doubt I left both sides unhappy, got an email from a banned editor and emailed an admin and no doubt left those two sides unhappy and/or pissed off, and discovered that Wikipediocracy is about to expose me for what it is I am. Whatever that is. Right now, I'm just a bit hollow, and cold to boot. Roll Tide, Drmies (talk) 05:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Kudos for staying busy...and keeping the folks over at Wikipediocracy occupied. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. Tiderolls 06:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/78.62.26.130[edit]

Would you please block Special:Contributions/78.62.26.130 in one year. He/she always edit-warring or genre warring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.178.84 (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

It does appear that they will not stop. Shame, really. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Tiderolls 03:41, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/136.169.191.219[edit]

Can you block him/her a month? Because he/she did edit-warring on Under My Skin (Avril Lavigne album) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.176.14 (talk) 08:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

One edit (with an edit summary) three days ago makes a weak argument for edit warring. The article has been protected by another admin so a block has been rendered unnecessary at this time. I would advise approaching the editor in question first with your concerns in the future. That might diffuse the situation before it actually becomes an edit war. Regards Tiderolls 11:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Deal[edit]

Hello; I am a friend of Kyan's. He's asked me to remove it, as he's now signed a record deal, they are about to release a new ep on the 28th; and they are trying to do an online clean up. The wiki article contains info such as DOB, where he lives (Cambridge); and reference to a previous album which has now been taken offline etc. I would appreciate it if you could aid me in deleting this page.

Kyan's email is kyankuatois@gmail.com His managers email is sarah.child@kuachimusic.com

Look forward to hearing from you

(Kim94xx (talk) 19:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC))
Hello, Kim94xx. With so close an association to the subject of the article, you should not be editing the article at all (see WP:Conflict of interest). Also, the reason you've given does not qualify for article deletion. If you have independent, reliable sources for the content changes please leave a message on the article talk page and another editor will make the changes. Regards Tiderolls 19:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

"Hello, Kim94xx. With so close an association to the subject of the article, you should not be editing the article at all (see WP:Conflict of interest). Also, the reason you've given does not qualify for article deletion. If you have independent, reliable sources for the content changes please leave a message on the article talk page and another editor will make the changes. Regards Tiderolls 19:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)"

Can you advise what you mean by an independent, reliable source for the content changes? I would really appreciate your help in getting this page removed. Can the subject of an article request a deletion?

If nothing is possible; would you allow me to merely edit a few of the compromising details ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kim94xx (talkcontribs) 19:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

@Kim94xx. We have a few rules; do not change the talk page posts of other editors. Sign your posts by typing four tildes at the conclusion of the post. To answer your question; s subject of an article can request article deletion. The details for sources can be found at WP:Identifying reliable sources. List the "compromising details" on the article talk page and if they require change I, or another editir, will make the change. You are continuing to edit the article, please stop. Tiderolls 19:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

No I didn't make a mistake,.. I guess it's not constructive but It's the truth. Monsanto is evil and Monsanto means death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.191.248 (talk) 19:47, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Wikipedia is not a forum one's personal commentary. Tiderolls 19:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Rollback Rights[edit]

I saw you left a message on my talk page dealing with my rollback rights. Please be more specific about my recent edits. What I am doing is going on STiki and reverting edits that I see to be vandalism. I don't see how I am jeopardizing my rights. If you leave a message here, I will see it. Leoesb1032 (talk) 22:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Batman194[edit]

Hi, Tide!

I'm having a little trouble with this guy. He's been making fairly innocuous but annoying demands regarding an article I used to work on for some while. Up to now, I've just ignored and deleted most of what he's done (see my talk page history if you want to bother), but recently he's become a touch more aggressive, and I finally told him not to post on my talk page any longer. Since then, he's posted three times, and reverted the last of the messages I reverted, insisting it was important. It's all done politely, but there's something underlying it that's just unsettling enough that I decided to finally alert an admin. Would you mind dropping by his talk page and reinforcing the policy regarding staying off a talk page once asked to do so? He claims to be retired, but that banner's been off an on his user page half a dozen times in the last couple hours as he remembers final edits he wants to do. Frankly, I doubt he's going to stay gone, and I'd appreciate the reminder on his talk page, just for my peace of mind. Grazie! --Drmargi (talk) 20:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Just for your information Drmargi, I'm really quitting! I'm not coming back permanently! Batman194 (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about[edit]

All I want is the safety and security of my family protected. Do you have family? Do you have children? Explain to me why you feel the need to make it easier for stalkers to have access my children? How does it benefit you to have this information included? Help me understand. BTW - I am not at all well versed on how to use Wikipedia. If there is an easier way to contact you, please let me know. Lisa EvanchoIts.anewday2b (talk) 15:20, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

@Its.anewday2b. There is an explanation at the top of this page that regards contacting me. Also, I explained I would watch your talk and respond there. I also explained how to accomplish your goal. Now can you let me know which part of these instructions were unclear? Tiderolls 15:24, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I am not sure about this new editor. Many of his or her edits have been obvious vandalism, such as this one [17]. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Ssilvers. They are staying just on the side of believability. Plus, the matter concerns itself with a BLP and a minor. I must err on the side of caution. Tiderolls
Hi. I saw your message on my talk page. Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. I am just helping out here: I have been editing the Jackie Evancho article for more than two years, and I helped to get it promoted to GA. I am very familiar with all of the references in the article; I also follow the news about Evancho and update the article frequently. So, my edits today were simply to 1) update some links that had gone dead; and 2) to eliminate some links that contained Evancho family information but that did not contain any important encyclopedic information that was not already contained in other sources cited. So, I think if you will look at what I have done, I have tried to help resolve the disagreement, while keeping in the article all the encyclopedic content. Let me know if I am misunderstanding something. All the best -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
So much for my requesting discussion remain in a single location at the top of this page. I've responded where I began. Tiderolls 20:01, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

List of metropolitan areas of Peru[edit]

Hi Tide rolls as I understand you are an administrator I request you can have some care in the article List of metropolitan areas of Peru because there is a user Johan92 that has been making wrong editions in the article see, I explained all I could but it seems he don't want understand see Talk:List of metropolitan areas of Peru and I have to leave now but I'm almost sure he will be back to make bad editions again in the article. Thanks for the attention you can have in the article. Maybe johan92 is since another ip direction a sock puppet of cmonzonc who has a report in the same talk page that says that he tried to delete the article see and also was reported for vandalism acts in other article see report maybe because his problem is that arequipa is third in the list and he insist to put it second. --Mastpolo (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

not bad edits, but correct.
I am putting links of reference for any user to corroborate my statementsJohan92 (talk) 03:47, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Jackie Evancho[edit]

Hi. I am following up regarding the Jackie Evancho article and the editor you blocked for seeking to delete some family- and location-related information from the article. If family members of an article subject who is a young teenager have a concern, I would like to make another effort to resolve it. If you prefer, feel free to respond via e-mail rather than here. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

(after an edit conflict)
It's your earnest belief I blocked them for "seeking to delete some family- and location-related information from the article? Then, yes, your review missed something. The individual in question was already informed of the public availability of the content before I arrived on the scene. I am quite responsive to the sensitivities of BLPs and minors; see [18] and [19] that deal with instance in particular. No, there was little effective communication. Much of my time was wasted in revdeleting multiple posts by the blocked individual that stated personal details of the minor. I am reluctant to accept the complete onus when an individual is hellbent on a course of action and is not absorbing what is being presented. Tiderolls 02:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

As I indicated in my second edit summary, I wrote my initial post before I found all the edits that were reverted off the editor's talkpage. Once I saw those my earlier concerns were substantially alleviated. I'll still try to make another effort to address this if the editor resurfaces. Sorry about the edit conflict. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I wanted to return to this page and again apologize for my misunderstanding the other night. As I said, when I initially reviewed the page I saw very little interaction with the user before she was blocked. The picture changed when I realized, a moment after I'd hit "save" on my message here, that I should check whether there was any additional interaction I wasn't seeing. I'm glad I did, but I wish I had done it five minutes sooner. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:00, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that consideration, Newyorkbrad. I could've been more circumspect in my response, so please forgive my moment of pique. Tiderolls 06:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Message for User talk:81.158.0.183[edit]

Hi

On going to the chinese history wiki entry I've had a message for User:81.158.0.183 regarding an edit but I haven't edited anything. Not sure what's happening there but thought it best that you knew about it. :)

81.158.0.183 (talk) 08:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I too have not visited the page your message refers to until the message directed me there. There is something wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.7.30.155 (talk) 21:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Relax, folks. The message at User talk:81.158.0.183 was posted 3-1/2 years ago and the message posted at User talk:94.7.30.155, while much more recent, was still September. Most IP addresses are dynamic and change over time. Maybe those messages were left for other editors; register an account and you will receive only those messages that are meant for you. Regards Tiderolls 16:23, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Algenon L. Marbley and long-term IP editor[edit]

Hi, the IP has waited out the six month semi-protection and then re-inserted the BLP violation... how about a one year block for the IP now? You tried three months last time, but this IP has been doing nothing else for over a year now. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:21, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Not a bad idea, Demiurge, but I don't mind revisiting the situation in six months. Thanks for your attention to this matter. See ya 'round Tiderolls 23:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

In desperate need of a block[edit]

When you get back online, if no one else has: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/76.65.96.208. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 09:30, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Softlavender. By the time I logged in the individual had not posted for a few hours. Even though they have returned from a two week hiatus to repeat their disruption, I get the feeling that they simply do not understand the impact of their actions. I've left them a message and am watchlisting their user talk, but if they see fit to repeat their disruption do not hesitate to make a report at WP:AIV. Of course, if I'm around I'll be glad to help out but my internet accessibility is not great at the moment and I can't be sure I'll be online at any specific time. Thanks for your attention to this matter. Tiderolls 13:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
There are a few similar instances with the same individual's name that I reverted this morning, all showing up with large red numbers in my contribution history, including three older ones that didn't come from the same IP. I wondered if I should ask for revdel - would you like to deal with those too? NebY (talk) 14:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
In process now, NebY. Thanks for the heads up. Tiderolls 15:19, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Brain natriuretic peptide and Vassopressin edits[edit]

Hello,

Thank you very much for advising me about the revision of the edits on the topics of Brain natriuretic peptide and vassopressin. I'm a little concerned however as to my knowledge I didn't make any of those edits but they seem linked to my IP address.

I've only heard about those two chemicals within the last 3-4 days at university lectures and I've definitely not tried to make edits to any wikis to my knowledge, I'm not even sure I opened a wikipedia about it however the wiki says I might have made those changes from as early as 2011.

I'm writing because I'm concerned that someone may have hijacked my IP address, after all my class was taught about those two chemicals over the last days of lectures. Would it be possible to verify this, do anything about it or prevent it in the future.

Regards137.219.97.29 (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Depending on how your ISP assigns accessibility, it's possible that you weren't using this particular IP address when the message was posted in 2011. One advantage of registering an account is that you will only receive messages that are expressly meant for you. Regards Tiderolls 12:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Franco-Prussian War?[edit]

Hello, you recently reprimanded me for my edit the the Franco-Prussian War page (User talk:70.190.158.159). The only problem is that I never edited that page, or any page for that matter. As far as I can remember, I don't believe that I have ever edited anything on Wikipedia. I think you have made an error. RS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.158.159 (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

New user on a rampage[edit]

Can you deal with this user: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/A8mo. You do this so much better than I can. I've been rollbacking but he needs further action. Thanks! Softlavender (talk) 05:15, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Tranquility of Soul[edit]

Just wanted to say I'm not sure about this one. They edit similar topics and focus on categorizing, so I agree evidence weighs against ToS in that respect. But they have completely different writing styles, both in their choice of words and their punctuation and capitalization. It's unfortunate ToS has used talk pages so little so there is not much to go on. At any rate, I don't think CensoredScribe has the self-awareness to change his writing style that much to avoid being caught. I could be more specific about the discrepancies, but I prefer not to on-wiki about socking behavior.--Atlan (talk) 09:46, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Atlan. My e-mail link is active so feel free to message me there if need be. I'll be glad to take another look at the evidence but I'm at work so it will be a few hours. I've instructed the user twice that their unblock request is malformed; if they would fix the formatting they would bring other admins to the page. More eyes is only rarely a bad thing. Thanks for your input. See ya 'round Tiderolls 12:16, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
I sent you an e-mail just now.--Atlan (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll examine the details. Finding another admin that can act more quickly might be an option for you. I'll ping you when I can give this my full attention. Tiderolls 16:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
There's no rush.--Atlan (talk) 16:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay, Atlan. I've reviewed the contributions for both accounts and I'm still convinced that the accounts are operated by the same individual. You may be able to convince ToS to reformat their unblock request so that other admins would be aware of the situation; I don't think that will help them but I've been wrong before. You make good points and I'm glad you brought them to my attention; the contribution histories are simply too compelling for me. Regards Tiderolls 16:31, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to actively pursue the matter any further. Although, if he makes another unblock request I might supply the same info to the reviewing admin.--Atlan (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Leave a note on ToS's talk page so that a reviewing admin will know you have info to share. Tiderolls 17:06, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Tide rolls. You have new messages at Robframpton's talk page.
Message added 13:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ 話 ♪ ߷ ♀ 投稿 ♀ 13:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Solarra. Thanks for the heads up. I've left another message trying explain things. Hopefully things will work out without anyone getting too frustrated. If you see the opportunity to lend a hand, please do. See ya 'round Tiderolls 15:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

No, actually[edit]

I didn't edit war. I was called a vandal, and was invited to show I wasn't so I did. I added a reference, but was again called a vandal. So to prove I wasn't a vandal I updated the article to explain the significance. That's not edit warring. I was invited to improve the edit and so I did. But if you want to be a jerk and block me for making a change after being invited to do so, feel free. Wikipedia used to be pretty awesome (I should know - I was a significant contributor in the past), but it seems to have continued down its path of power tripping admins with poor judgement. - 110.20.126.106 (talk) 00:19, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I never called you a vandal and I never accused you of edit warring. I pointed you to policy and guideline pages to prevent your being blocked. Since I've edited the article in question I wouldn't realistically be in a position to block you anyway. If you'd rather not take my advice, I'm good with that; you can hang on to the oppressed editor routine, though, it's kind of stale. Tiderolls 13:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

message you left for me[edit]

I have no idea at all what you are talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezpetunia (talkcontribs) 12:13, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Ezpetunia. Your user talk has not been created, so I've never left a message there. If I've messaged you somewhere else you'll have to be more specific as I do not remember seeing your username. Tiderolls 13:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you, thank you, thank you, for blocking that vandal on the page about the Mau Mau rebellion today. O Great Britannia (talk) 20:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The Bourne Identity?[edit]

I never ever have made any contributions to anything on wikipedia, I think you have the wrong person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.44.16 (talk) 02:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to MediaCorp Channel U may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Channel U was closes down with last television programme, [station ident and finally the national anthem was broadcasts the end.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:22, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Palringo[edit]

Hi – I noticed that you recently edited the Palringo article. I've prepared a userspace draft that is fully referenced and NPOV to resolve the citation/notability/weight issues affecting the current article. I have a conflict of interest in that I work for Bell Pottigner, a UK PR agency, and that Palringo is my client. My aim is to work with the community to establish consensus. I've posted on the talk page and on COIN. If you have time to take a look at my proposed redraft that would be very much appreciated. Many thanks. HOgilvy (talk) 21:26, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, HOgilvy. Thanks for your message. I'm a bit at a loss for internet time presently so my contribution will be limited, if at all. I'm sure you will be able get input from editors with skills superior to mine, though. Regards Tiderolls 13:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi – no worries thanks for replying. Any suggestions as to who might be interested in something like this? Thanks. HOgilvy (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@HOgilvy: My first suggestion would be to check the article talk page and leave neutrally worded messages (see WP:CANVAS) on the talk pages of the Wiki projects listed. If you do not receive what you consider adequate feedback you might consider a request for comment (see WP:RFC). I hope that helps. Tiderolls 16:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
That's good advice – thanks again. HOgilvy (talk) 09:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

96.225.136.129[edit]

IP address user 96.225.136.129[20][21] is vandalizing pages by adding in References that are not true, for example, the Legacy of Kain games are set in a different world and not in ours.[22]. Nowhere on that page of on others[23] is it ever stated that it takes place on Earth.-68.75.21.12 (talk) 21:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

After a brief look it appears that there are some disruptive edits; however, this is an editorial opinion. I know nothing of the subject and have just as much interest in maintaining a comprehensive record of such unsourced, mundane subjects. I suggest you contact the editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games to obtain a more informed and committed opinion. Regards Tiderolls 07:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Allegro Development Corporation[edit]

I saw your message about editing the Allegro article. I have been removing a subsection that talks about the former CEO's new company. It was distracting and not beneficial to me as a reader, and another editor keeps adding it back. I look forward to your feedback as I don't want to get in trouble for "Edit warring."Hardenftw (talk) 22:08, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

@Hardenftw: Well, that's kind of the definition of edit warring; to "not get in trouble" all one has to do is stop and discuss their content issues on the article talk page. You should probably read WP:Edit warring, WP:3RR, WP:BRD and WP:Consensus before continuing to edit. Let me know if you have any questions. Regards Tiderolls 12:30, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Stating a character is popular with no source[edit]

User SNAAAAKE!![24] is stating in the Sarah Bryant article that she's one of the most popular and well-recognized characters of the series but is doing so without a source.[25] The Reception section pretty much only talks about her looks and not her popularity.68.75.22.29 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

People who lie.[edit]

Stating that someone is lying is absolutely not a personal attack. All that such a statement means is that what they are saying is contradicted by reality. It makes no comment whatever about their character. If I say the sun is purple, anyone is free to say that such a statement is a lie, and that's not an attack against me, it's a contradiction of my statement.

Further, my accusation of sockpuppetry was not a personal attack, all I stated was that if some person's statement was true, then it would be an admission of sockpuppetry. I **refuse** to be castigated by strangers for things I have not said. That is utter nonsense. I made a valid correction to an article. That article has person who watches every change made and reverts them based on their whim. Which is fine. Most articles in Wikipedia now have an obsessed person who stalks any changes made. but when that person violates the three revert edit rule, and then goes and looks up any other edits I have made and challenges them with no basis, and gets any admin they can find to complain to, (and is probably faking an article 'consensus' by having sock puppets), then I am not the one doing wrong here. The wikipedia system is deeply flawed. It's collapsed into nonsense like this, and the article on the Eastern Orthodox Church is a joke. It's mostly confused and off topic. And for you to go off on me, when I am not the party violating standards is ridiculous. 129.133.125.225 (talk) 01:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, talk page stalker here.
Stating that someone is lying is absolutely not a personal attack. All that such a statement means is that what they are saying is contradicted by reality. It makes no comment whatever about their character. If I say the sun is purple, anyone is free to say that such a statement is a lie, and that's not an attack against me, it's a contradiction of my statement.
First, start by deciding whether you're talking about (A) the characterization of somebody as lying, or (B) the characterization of a statement as a lie. Secondly, note that in most societies and at most times (though with very many exceptions), anyone is free to say that anything is anything. (I'm free to call Tide rolls a hamster. Tide rolls is free to call me a stick of asparagus.) ¶ Your seeming interpretation of "lie" as merely "false statement" seems extraordinary. Here's Harry Frankfurt on lies (via a prefatory examination of humbug, on his way to the investigation of bullshit):
In this respect, the property of being humbug is similar to that of being a lie, which is identical neither with the falsity nor with any of the other properties of the statement the liar makes, but which requires that the liar makes his statement in a certain state of mind — namely, with an intention to deceive.
-- Hoary (talk) 10:14, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Stick of asparagus...lol...good one. Tiderolls 12:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, Hoary, if you had some sort of point to make, you missed it. Your post only showed that "(A) the characterization of somebody as lying, or (B) the characterization of a statement as a lie" is a distinction without a difference. If a series of lies are uttered, how then does one describe the speaker? As an honest man?

In any event, we have the usual gang mentality of Wikipedia blundering along, defending erroneous information in an article and defending the member of the tribe. It's really ridiculous.

Now we have a record that Hoary and Tide rolls are willing to defend someone who has announced they are use a sockpuppet account to create a false consensus. You two are excellent admins.129.133.125.225 (talk) 02:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Blanking[edit]

A collection of IPs and meat/sockpuppets have been mass blanking Ian Charleson Awards. Can you please help? Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 16:29, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Softlavender. Situations like these are one source of my low level distaste for "List" articles. The revision history appears to indicate a content dispute; I could be entirely wrong and beg your forgiveness if I've missed something obvious. If you want to let know where I could find more discussion on recent incidents there, I'd be interested. As an aside, I'd caution you about proceeding to revert further pending some determination of consensus. Regards Tiderolls 17:30, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hello,

I work for Allegro Development and I am curious as to why the intense interest in what is supposed to be a simple corporate presence and informational page. Has Wikipedia become a gossip rag or does it purport to be an encyclopedia like entity? I am not trying to be sarcastic, I am genuinely curious and perplexed.

Why is it not: Who is Allegro, What do they do, and a then bit of history on the development of the company, and some references? Instead it appears to be a place where people with petty agendas are having 12 year old level arguments and posting battles. Can you please illuminate?

Thanks,

Kelly Hoerner 66.250.6.102 (talk) 20:23, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The only answer I have to offer is that your perception of this project's purpose is a bit off. That's not to say that the formula for the article you outline (Who is Allegro, What do they do, and a then bit of history on the development of the company) is so out of step with our norm. If content is notable (see WP:Notability) and is supported by independent, secondary sources (see WP:Identifying reliable sources) then the content is added to the encyclopedia. If you wish to post to the article's talk page you may initiate a discussion in which your questions would be answered. Regards Tiderolls 21:55, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited MediaCorp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bulletin. 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) 09:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited MediaCorp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bulletin. 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) 09:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

108.240.19.166[edit]

IP address 108.240.19.166 vandalized the Casey Jones[26] by deleting a lot of info for no reason at all.108.82.6.62 (talk) 18:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

My account[edit]

You made an intervention at my Talk page and I responded. I remarked that I was hoping to find time over the next few weeks to write up Lindqvist, the precedent for the recent so-called "right to be forgotten" ECJ decision. I should now like to start doing that, but naturally I'm unwilling to do this if my contributions are to be reverted or blocked by an administrator because they believe I am editing too "adroitly" (I take it you were suggesting my account is in some way illegitimate).

In the first place I am requesting reassurance from you, without which I am not prepared to continue editing.

Thank you. RR 2014 (talk) 23:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Help write something?[edit]

Since you've done some work on literally Everything, I was wondering if you could help build an article on the rather abstract concept of Something. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:23, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmm[edit]

Not exactly rolling yet, Tide.

Apologies, Professor. My internet access is severely limited on the weekends. Tiderolls 12:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
As long as your defense shows up. Drmies (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Tide, please pull out your admin handbook, and flip to the BLP section. Then look at this edit (and its edit summary, of course). I don't know if this is typical for such articles, but I strongly object to them, and, ahem, not just cause I'm rooting for you know who--I imagine that for Tennessee this would take up ten times as much space, and the same for the Ag School That Cannot Write Its Name (but pays my mortgage). Anyway, I expect to get reverted on this, and this might well rub some people in The Football Project the wrong way--and I'm interested in your opinion. (talk) 00:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Professor. BLP applies as far as I'm concerned, but I have a very restrictive view on such things. And, yes, I would apply the same principle regardless of the school. Notability might be another guideline that would apply; unless the transgressions were of such magnitude as we've seen exhibited by some NFL players recently. Anyway, I've watchlisted the article in the event that talk page discussion is forthcoming. Roll Tide Tiderolls 15:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Tide. Hey, we're up to #2. Not that that means anything. Somehow I see trouble on the way, though I'm glad I'm not a Florida fan right now. Purely for amusement purposes: my 5-year old is making sure there are no orange fun close to any blue things. Like, no OJ in blue cups. Aubs eat boogers! Drmies (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

MoS disruption[edit]

Since I see you often protecting Asian network/channel articles based on MoS disruption, could you have a look at Sensasi and ONE TV ASIA. I have just reverted for the second time in a little over an hour. Thank you in advance for any help, Aspects (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Aspects. Tiderolls 12:23, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Another observation[edit]

Hello. This is a response to the following message I got today, 11th september 2014:

Hello, I'm Tide rolls. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made to German orthography reform of 1996, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Tiderolls 21:24, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

The sentence where I added - or rather, started to add - my contribution was the following: "Some[who?] have suggested that the main cause of the current controversy over the spelling reform was the seven-year transitional period.[citation needed]". As a native speaker of Hochdeutsch (my mother's tongue) I believe there can be no doubt on the fact that the seven-year transitional period greatly enhanced controversy over the spelling reform; controversy which - on the other hand - is totally justified, being a gross oversimplification of some meaningful historical grounds of the German language. I therefore planned to add a citation (where it is still needed) of scientific literature apt to demonstrate this point, and for first I just put down a note - which is the contribution you undid - to be continued. Unfortunately, I could not find any literature on this specific subject, and therefore I had to renounce my intention. But I forgot to cancel the note I had jotted down. Now you decided to undo it; and I completely agree with that, as you can imagine. Thanks, 95.224.254.209 (talk) 08:56, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

You may have seen the message 11 September 2014 but it was posted 4 November 2012. Also, don't indent with your space bar; use the colon. Compare the current version with yours. Regards Tiderolls 09:56, 11 September 2014 (UTC)