User talk:Wiki Historian N OH: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Notice: new section
Line 79: Line 79:


I also strongly urge you to use a lot of self-restraint about reverting things, if others begin to do other cleanup edits on material you contributed, which you might disagree with. I hope this can be solved without putting you on a formal revert limitation or actually blocking you, but be aware that revert-warring (even below the [[WP:3RR]] threshold) will not be tolerated. Whenever you feel you must revert something, make sure you explain it politely on the talk page first, and then ''wait'' for discussion before you actually make the edit. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 09:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I also strongly urge you to use a lot of self-restraint about reverting things, if others begin to do other cleanup edits on material you contributed, which you might disagree with. I hope this can be solved without putting you on a formal revert limitation or actually blocking you, but be aware that revert-warring (even below the [[WP:3RR]] threshold) will not be tolerated. Whenever you feel you must revert something, make sure you explain it politely on the talk page first, and then ''wait'' for discussion before you actually make the edit. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 09:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Flip off. Contribute something to the article besides village idiocy.

[[User:Wiki Historian N OH|Wiki Historian N OH]] ([[User talk:Wiki Historian N OH#top|talk]]) 20:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:42, 25 April 2010

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Wiki Historian N OH, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 07:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arena District Columbus.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Arena District Columbus.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Wiki Historian N OH (talk) 11:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Columbus, Ohio

It is a problem to make the assertions you made in the first senetence of the entry Columbus, Ohio. For starters, the presence of the terms "ultramodern" and "clean" as they were used in the first sentence of the leading section cannot be considered to be neutral and unbiased. Not only is the definition of "ultramodern" hazy and unspecified, but there was also no citation given that demonstrates a consensus view that Columbus is an ultramodern city. Calling it clean may be appropriate, but not in the first sentence. This would be a section or subsection further down in the article, perhaps giving information on the city's public infrastructure. JEN9841 (talk) 21:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And adding to that, you have to be careful that the article doesn't become a promotional piece, but instead stays as an encyclopedic one, which means neutral and highly sourced. "Ultramodern" is not well-defined like JEN said and is highly based on point of view. Clean is debateable as well. If both terms have been used by reliable third-party sources, then some mention can be made, but again, make sure those sources aren't tourist sites or sites from the city itself. --JonRidinger (talk) 22:36, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Arena District Columbus.jpg

File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Arena District Columbus.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Janszoon's- Jan and Anthony

I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your very helpful edits on the pages for Jan Janszoon and Anthony Janszoon van Salee. They are now much more in useful articles and are more in line with wikipedia standards. It has also given me a few additional sources to pursue in my research on them. Do you know if that play you sourced is translated to english anywhere, or will be performed outside of the netherlands anytime soon? Thank you. Gecko G (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added some more stuff and sources. Wiki Historian N OH (talk) 18:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

George Barne

No problem. You can create a new page for II here, just make sure to overwite the #REDIRECT. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 16:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Frederick VIII of Denmark. Thank you. Law Lord (talk) 01:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliment and awareness of edit summaries. Wiki Historian N OH (talk) 02:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reading my compliments. Cheers. --Law Lord (talk) 02:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marysville banner

I feel like your actions have not been reflective of the accepted practices on Wikipedia. First of all, you appear to refuse to recognize the significance of WP:CONSENSUS. Everyone else who has weighed in on this matter has disagreed with you. Can you point to one single editor who has written in support of your position?

Even so, the single voice in the wildnerness can, in theory, be the voice of truth. But if yours is such a voice, I am finding it almost incoherent at times. I have already asked you about the following statements of yours which I find confusing:

  • The political existence of this city is attached to the political designation it received.
  • The only weight the banner places in the article is the weight of the entire article itself, not just one aspect of it lacking an attachment to everything else.
  • As the guidelines state, no one owns an article, therefore lacking any definitive authority to remove something rivals vandalism and compromises the integrity of Wikipedia.

and I have asked you to re-explain yourself. But you ignore my questions.

You also stated the banner is neutral; I gave a full-one paragraph statement as to why I did not agree with that statement. You have not seen fit to rebut that paragraph. Your strongest argument has been that this matter is ambiguous. Perhaps so. That's why we don't let a single editor make decisions in the event of disagreements. But you've never once explained why you think that WP:CONSENSUS doesn't apply to you or your article.

You also need to learn some courtesy. In this edit, you said--to an editor who had never before edited this page--that he needed to "stop vandalizing". What he did was easily justifiable, but regardless of whether you agree with it or not there is not one administrator on Wikipedia that would concur with your assessment of his edit as "vandalism". That was just rude and uncalled for.

So I will be reporting this to WP:ANI, if you place the banner back up there before we have a serious and open discussion which arrives at consensus. That's just the way it works around here, by consensus. Check it out. 98.82.23.93 (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I indicated I would, I have posted this matter to WP:ANI as you have placed the banner back on the page without demonstrating a good faith attempt to establish consensus. 98.82.23.93 (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

As you have certainly noticed, there has been a discussion of your editing at WP:ANI#Marysville, Ohio banner. There is a consensus that your editing at that page, with respect to the "Preserve America Community" banner, was highly inappropriate. You have been persistently editing against WP:CONSENSUS, which is one of the fundamental pillars of Wikipedia. There is also some well-founded concern that other aspects of your editing in this and other articles will require cleanup, in terms of neutrality and encyclopedicity.

This is a formal warning that if you insert that banner again you will be blocked.

I also strongly urge you to use a lot of self-restraint about reverting things, if others begin to do other cleanup edits on material you contributed, which you might disagree with. I hope this can be solved without putting you on a formal revert limitation or actually blocking you, but be aware that revert-warring (even below the WP:3RR threshold) will not be tolerated. Whenever you feel you must revert something, make sure you explain it politely on the talk page first, and then wait for discussion before you actually make the edit. Fut.Perf. 09:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flip off. Contribute something to the article besides village idiocy.

Wiki Historian N OH (talk) 20:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]