User talk:MusikAnimal

User
Talk
Dashboard
Articles
Scripts
Tools
Templates
Userboxes
Awards

Talk

Where this user is, it is 5:27 pm, 2 November 2024 UTC [refresh].

Arrowsmith Program

I moved the Arrowsmith School article to be called Arrowsmith Program and added tons of information with sources, and then a different user, Taeyebaar (talk · contribs), undid all of that and changed "Arrowsmith Program" back to "Arrowsmith School" deleting everything I had added, without explanation. I want to revert what that user did. Can you please help me do that or do it yourself? Do you have any other comments or advice? (I don't know how to revert what the other user did myself.) Eaqq (talk) 04:52, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I worry my above message isn't clear enough so I will restate my problem:
1. I moved "Arrowsmith School" to "Arrowsmith Program" because almost all of the content and sources is actually about the Arrowsmith Program, NOT the Arrowsmith School.
2. I added a lot of information and added sources (about the program) and removed unsourced sentences.
3. A different user, Taeyebaar (talk · contribs), undid the move.
4. I very much want to move "Arrowsmith School" to "Arrowsmith Program" again but I know that edit warring isn't allowed so I would like your advice. I know I can make a new Wikipedia article named "Arrowsmith Program" but I don't think that's the best thing to do and don't want to do that. For example, everything in the "Criticism" section is about the Arrowsmith Program (NOT the Arrowsmith School). The notability is with the program, NOT the school. If I were to make a new article (Arrowsmith Program) and leave the "Arrowsmith School" article, that would be wrong because (not to repeat myself....) the content in "Arrowsmith School" is actually about the program! (Again, the Arrowsmith School is *not* notable. The program is what is talked about in news articles. So if I were to make a different Wikipedia article entitled "Arrowsmith Program", the content at "Arrowsmith School" that is about the program would need to be erased and then there would be barely an article. The Arrowsmith School in Toronto does not warrant its own Wikipedia article.)
5. If I do what I would like to do (move it again, and if the other user Taeyebaar (talk · contribs) wants, I can add a section for the Arrowsmith School in the "Arrowsmith Program" article), I fear the other user will revert again and it will be an edit war.
6. Can you please tell me what to do? I really believe that moving "Arrowsmith School" to "Arrowsmith Program" is the right thing to do. Should I just move it again and see if the other user reverts or not? Thank you.
You can see here how I vastly improved the article.
And you can read Taeyebaar's side here. I strongly disagree with Taeyebaar and it doesn't look like consensus between Taeyebaar and I will be reached. Eaqq (talk) 05:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

@Eaqq: Wow, sorry! Forgot to get back to you! Anyway, addressing your concerns is pretty simple. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, so if someone else disagrees with something, it's up to you and them to find a consensus, or something you can both agree on. The best way to do this is to discuss the matter on the article's talk page, which is at Talk:Arrowsmith Program. That way others who are also familiar with the subject can chime in as well. Hope this helps! — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@Eaqq: Sorry you already said you tried to reach a consensus. In this kind of scenario, you should seek dispute resolution. The kind folks over there will help decide what's best. Not that I don't mind you reaching out to me directly (by all means, feel free anytime!), but I am busy at the moment. Sorry! — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Motto

"My conscious is a jukebox" is a cool quote. But it's not grammatically correct. 'Concious' is an adjective, not a noun.[1] Might I suggest either "My consciousness is a jukebox" or "My conscience is a jukebox". :)50.5.78.205 (talk) 02:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

It's a noun to me! :) Seriously though, the #2 entry of that liked definition states usage as a noun. The free dictionary defines it as a psychoanal term, with a definition that's even more aligned with what I'm going after. I would say "conscience" but that's a different word altogether, right? That would mean "knowing right from wrong" rather than "awake". Meanwhile Wiktionary has not adopted a noun form yet :( And frankly consciousness is too much of a mouthful. I don't know what to do! — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/대우건설/Archive#05 November 2014

I saw it now, so replying now...
Global lock does not autoblock globally, so local block is nessesary to apply autoblock. (Though autoblock lasts only for 24 hrs...) (PS. I think kowiki filter #50 (filter to preventing this sock) would be useful here... (It has been disallowing lots of 대우건설's edit on kowiki) If you are interested in creating a filter, I can send a copy. (#50 is private.) )— Revi 04:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@Revi: I see. It's been about a month since the last report, so not sure if we should move forward with an edit filter, but good to know we have that on hand if we need it :) Thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

New friend is here: User:신용회복위원회 - that's why I mentioned edit filter. — Revi 04:55, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Aha. Well then, you can email me at Special:EmailUser/MusikAnimal and I'll get on that :) On second thought there may not be enough long-term disruption to warrant a filter, but still happy to take a look. Cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:59, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

He was around since August 2013. I think it warrants "long-term"... Anyway I sent it already. — Revi 05:14, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Amamamamama

I see you have blocked Amamamamama for a week. Given that 90% of this contributor's edits seem to consist of homophobic vandalism, can I ask why the block wasn't indefinite? AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:32, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

And incidentally, this 'contributors' user page probably merits attention. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:36, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@AndyTheGrump: It was more just to halt the disruption so I could get a chance to examine the user's contribution history. No doubt WP:NOTHERE and I've reblocked as such. Sorry you had to go through that — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:41, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello from 75.110.24.109

Ya it needs to be noted that 'queer heterosexuality' is and always will be a extremely offensive term to actual queer people, mainly because it forces common gender stereotypes onto people who do not want to conform to them and claims an oppressed title to someone who has never been oppressed because of who they love. My writing on it was merely noting that it is an offensive term, and I do not believe it should have been deleted. 75.110.24.109 (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

You should bring your concerns to the talk page. Please note that Wikipedia is not censored, and rest assured the authors of the article are not out to offend you. That article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, a community-wide effort to improve these types of articles. Consider getting involved with that project, I'm sure they'd love to have someone who is as passionate about the subject as you are. — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

filter #648

Please add this user's last replace on own talk page - it's post-block vandal on his talkpage. — Revi 05:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Specifically this string; [removed]. I had to revert war with this user until he is locked. — Revi 17:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

User talk:MusikAnimal/Archive 8#Nicholas McDonald

Nicholas McDonald - Revdel and perhaps indef semi. The IP resumed adding material on 24th November merely hours after the protection expired. - NQ (talk) 18:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

@NQ: Nothing else revdelable in my opinion, but I've semi-protected for another six months. I had mentioned other possible preventive measures but I think sticking with semi is probably best. Thanks for being on top of this ongoing issue! — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Revdel: [2] [3] and [4]. - NQ (talk) 18:54, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 10) and List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 11) are often targeted, although the disruption is relatively less. [5] [6] - NQ (talk) 18:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

• Maybe a temporary protection of List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 11) is in order? Not sure though, since there are constructive edits by other IPs. Rev del : [7] [8] [9]. Thanks! - NQ (talk) 21:49, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

  Unfortunately, if revdel criteria is met, I'm not willing to do anything less than semi – even if the edit rate were low enough for pending changes. — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. - NQ (talk) 12:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

• Op-ed: Who edits health-related content on Wikipedia and why?

• In the media: Embroidery and cheese

• Featured content: ABCD: Any Body Can Dance!

• Traffic report: Turkey and a movie

• WikiProject report: Today on the island

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:31, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

You have mail!

Hello, MusikAnimal. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 17:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Yeah, it's about him. (I usually tag this first and send mail...) — Revi 17:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for conducting the Good Article review for Duesenberg Model A, and for your guidance in improving the article. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 15:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

My pleasure! — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-50

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent software changes

• All users are now getting pages from servers that run the HHVM tool. HHVM should make pages load faster. [10]
• You can join a video chat about Phabricator on December 11 at 18:00 (UTC). Phabricator is the new tool to report issues. [11]

Problems

• There was a problem with Phabricator on November 29. It was due to a network issue. [12]

Software changes this week

• The new version of MediaWiki (1.25wmf11) has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since December 3. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from December 9. It will be on all Wikipedias from December 10 (calendar). [13]
• You can now exit VisualEditor by pressing the "Esc" key. [14]
• It is now easier to use VisualEditor with IMEs. Typing in Malayalam now works better. [15] [16]
• The new version of OOjs UI fixed many issues with the size and layout of buttons in dialogs. [17] [18] [19]
• (Lua) You can no longer use mw.text.unstrip to get the HTML from special page transclusion. You can see a list of scripts to fix. [20] [21]

Future changes

• Starting next week JavaScript tools won't work if they use jQuery Migrate. [22]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:11, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Jack Walsh (boxer)

I don't understand why you removed the speedy deletion tag from Jack Walsh (boxer). The reference you mentioned doesn't support the fight record in his bio, the claim that he is WBC champion (which is obviously false) or even his purported weight class. This is an obvious hoax. Tchaliburton (talk) 17:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

@Tchaliburton: You are correct that data does not match up. I just saw that Walsh was also a boxer from the UK and assumed there was something to the article. Turns out the data was copied from Anthony Joshua, another UK-based boxer. Speedy deleted as A10, but agreed it may have been intentionally created as a hoax. It might have also just been a test page, where they copied the table from the other article but never filled in the correct data. I'll leave a message on their talk page. Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Cynlouise

HI MusikAnimal I continue to remove the citing of a court trial because it is listed under police misconduct. There was never any police misconduct assessed from this case. As I had previously suggested to the person who includes this that it it better suited as an entry under Austin Municipal Court. Also, if you a fairly monitoring this site, ArizonaComback seems intent on making this an anti-APD website instead of allowing all factual information on the page, such as patrol areas, pictures of sub stations, etc. They keep being removed and the person's comments to me are juvenile and insulting. I would appreciate any help to keep this page neutral. Cynlouise 12/9/14 Cynlouise (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

@Cynlouise: Hey! I see that you are relatively new here and may not be familiar with our policies and guidelines. For starters, I know nothing about the Austin Police Department, I just saw your edit while patrolling recent changes. I noticed you removed sourced content and replaced it with unsourced content. Generally this, in any capacity, is not allowed. Verifiability is a backbone of an encyclopedia, and we need to do our best to maintain that. The content you removed may be negative, but it was reliably sourced, and from what I can tell, relevant to the subject. So, you are correct that we want to maintain neutrality, but we also want to include any relevant information, negative or not, provided it is well-sourced. That being said I don't know that removing that much content without consensus is the best idea. I recommend taking your concerns to the talk page. There you and the other editors can together decide on what's best for the article.

Finally, while it's sad it occurred, I'm not sure if listing all the fallen officers is really appropriate for an encyclopedia. We should instead only write about officers that are themselves notable. This is to comply with the notion that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Hope this all makes sense. Let me know if you need help. — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Kmvhmv (continued)

Hi, back in October you blocked Kmvhmv for disruptive editing, see User talk:MusikAnimal/Archive 9#Kmvhmv. You provided a much appreciated 1 month block. However, the vandal is back again. What do you think is the most appropriate next step? OSX (talk • contributions) 08:27, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

@OSX: I don't think we're left with much of a choice. The user fails to communicate or get the point. There's enough evidence, particularly with the lack of communication, that they will continue to behave in the same way, so I have block the account indefinitely. — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like a good outcome to me. Thanks for that. Have a good day. OSX (talk • contributions) 22:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Jeff Smisek

Thank you so much for intervening with the Jeff Smisek situation. The same person has been deleting well-sourced content for years, and adding unsourced content of his/her own. Thank you for keeping an eye on the situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lauraface32 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Heart tattoo AfD

I have changed it on your suggestion; I definitely did not intend for it to be that harsh and did not realize the original editor has been trying to work to make it acceptable. A long week with finals coming up, I should not have taken it out on the AfD and I apologize for my tone for sure. Nate • (chatter) 06:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

No worries! I figured you meant no harm :) Thank you for rewording it. — MusikAnimal ^talk 06:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Uploading images

MusikAnimal Hey! What's up? I have a question. In any article, how can I upload an image? Please check and tell me ASAP. Thank you. Adham Baghdadi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adham2911B (talk • contribs)

@Adham2911B: Hey! Everything you need to know is detailed here. In a nutshell, if the media was released under a commons-compatible license or you own the copyright, you should upload to Wikimedia Commons so that it can be shared amongst other Wikimedia projects. Otherwise if it falls under fair-use you can upload it locally via the File Upload Wizard. Just make sure it is within the confines of our image use policy (if you are unsure you just can ask me). Finally, once the file is uploaded, see WP:IMAGESYNTAX for the syntax to use in the article. Let me know if you need help.

PS – You can sign your post on talk pages by inserting four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end. That will automatically insert your username and a timestamp. — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:30, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

FYI

Hi mate, just FYI I sent you an email the other day. You don't have to prioritise it or even reply at all considering it took me an absurdly long time to reply to yours. Just letting you know. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Fabian Johnson

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 02:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Special:AbuseLog/11268151 and some more

Not sure why this is caught... Filter shouldn't disallow thisnuser's edit... I turned off disable for now. — Revi 06:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Needs a Check.

Hi, I was reviewing the AFC Articles when i saw this draft.I looked that whether this article existed in Wikipedia,then i saw that an article with same title and content was created on the same date as on when this draft was created.I require your help so that i can know that which editor has copied the other editors work or whether these two editors are same.The link for the article on wikipedia is as follows: Computational Fluid Dynamics for Phase Change Materials.--Param Mudgal ^talk? 11:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)