User talk:Skyerise

Welcome!

Hello, Skyerise, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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! Hyacinth (talk) 16:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Image sizing, Gustav Mahler

I have replied to your message re the above on my talkpage. I don't think you have actually read the guideline in question - it might help if you did so before giving your opinion, let alone shouting it in your edit summaries. I note that you altered the Mahler lead image size from "thumb" to "upright" - what do you imagine justifies that, by any reading of the guidelines? It seems you have a lot to learn, both about Wikipedia procedures and about personal interactions. Brianboulton (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Garbo

In consideration of that would it not be necessary for Garbo to specifically self-identify as a Lutheran for inclusion in that category? Where she baptised into Lutherianism does not necessarily mean she continued to self-identify as such. Furthermore, what of those article such as historic figures who know to have belonged to a particular group but did not specify it? For example we know that Mary, Queen of Scots was a Roman Catholic but did not ever publicly say it herself. Is it then wrong to include her in the Catholics category? I am satisfied that the sources I provided were academic and reliable enough to merit inclusion in the Rosicrucian category and that I have met the wikipedia requirements for such. If I must reference this in the body of the article itself I will but do not feel it should really be necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.243.186 (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Important note

Please see WP:BLPN#Inge Lynn Collins Bongo and double-check, then check again, then check once more, that every single word you say is supported by sources more reliable than - well, I'd have said the Bank of America, but that's looking a bit shaky right now. This is serious stuff, you are potentially opening yourself to legal scrutiny by edits to that article right now, so please take care and remember WP:BLP, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NPOV. Feel free to ask at the BLP noticeboard for any clarification or guidance you might need. Thanks, Guy (Help!) 21:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Hilda Solis edits

Thanks very much for your edits at United States Department of Labor and Hilda Solis. I have been battling User:Labor reporter on this, but had to back off lest I be accused of edit warring. (See User talk:Wasted Time R#Labor stuff for the full story.) I do have one question, however, which is why you left in what you did in the Solis article. There are no WP:RS sources here; just three union website publications (not neutral, nor are they supposed to be) and one WP:PRIMARY transcript with a somewhat underwhelming mention of a work rules issue. In particular, the statement "Relations with her employees, while first very good, have soured" that is still there is completely unsupported by third-party, neutral sources. While it's evident that at least part of AFGE Local 12 has issues with her, there's nothing that states they they represent a majority of the Labor Department's employees (typically, many government employees don't belong to any union), nor even that the leadership's views are reflective of the rank-and-file who are members. Nor for that matter is there anything that says her relations with employees were good in the first place. While I have argued that none of this material belongs in the article (pending The Washington Post or a similar news source reporting on it, if any do), at the very least I think that sentence has to go. Let me know what you think. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Your approach is somewhat unorthodox, but we'll see how it goes. I've got the article listed at WP:BLP/N as well. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Inge Lynn Collins Bongo

Hello Yworo. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Inge Lynn Collins Bongo, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article is not substantially the same as the deleted version. A new deletion discussion is required. Thank you. Tim Song (talk) 05:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Reconsidered upon a closer examination of the AfD. Sorry for the confusion. Tim Song (talk) 05:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Please review Wikipedia reliable source and verifiability policies. In particular, please note that usenet, mailing lists, blogs, and online forums are not considered reliable sources and may not be used to cite material in Wikipedia articles. If a reliable third-party source cannot be found for a fact or quotation, then that fact or quotation may not be included in a Wikipedia article. Yworo (talk) 21:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Explain this to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_history authors. It's just one of many good examples.

Thanks for all other edits. I am seeking for reference sources.

I am not connect to subject, there is no conflict of interest. Please, delete same type of reference source from Linux history article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_history#cite_note-groups.google.com-7) and I am convinced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigown (talk • contribs) 23:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Diacritics and links

Fair enough.From now on I'll add a separated link within the text, which is possible. --68.175.33.254 (talk) 23:16, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Waldorf and related

Thanks for all the cleanup you've been doing on these sites! Nice to have an expert equipped with a fine-toothed comb. hgilbert (talk) 01:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of BEE Lisp

The article BEE Lisp has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

(Although your last edits to the article were almost a year ago, I notify you because you did make five edits to the article—its most frequent editor stopped editing there a few days before you started—and figured you might care about what happens.) --an odd name 07:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Attempt to create Wikipedia policy about longevity of citation needed tags on Pente article and lies to cover it up and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks,

Gee thanks for the notification. Please note you've skipped most of the steps of dispute resolution so it'll likely be declined. What a waste of time. I never meant "yes there is" a time limit. I meant, "yes, there is" a reason for removing stale uncited material. But seems you prefer to call another editor a "liar" before even asking a clarification of what was meant. At that moment you became a troll to me, and that's the only reason I removed the discussion. I'm not even going to respond to your pitiful abuse of the arbitration process. Go ahead and climb the Reichtag dressed as Spider-Man all by yourself. Cheers. Yworo (talk) 01:04, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

You recent edits

Hi Yworo, thank you for your recent edits to the Eliseo Soriano article. Currently, there is BLP thread regarding the subject. The article is currently blocked for anons like me due to years of edit warring and disputes. Is it okay for you if you add these templates:{{BLP dispute}} and {{POV-intro}}? Thanks! 180.191.61.141 (talk) 02:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I found it on BLP. I'll consider adding those, but I've been editing all day and not fresh enough to really evaluate and was about to sign off. I'll try to take a look and add if I think appropriate tomorrow. Yworo (talk) 02:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Timothy Ferriss

Hi Yworo, just wanted to let you know that I mistakenly reinstated some of the contributions from Laurawelker that you had deleted from this page. I had not followed completely the trail that led to the appropriate banning of this user, and was thinking it was useful to keep the content as evidence in just such a proceeding. I've re-deleted it now, hope I've left everything in OK condition there. Shorn again (talk) 18:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

My page

 Giacomo  20:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

an/i

The requestor consented to closing the thread--he did not consent to collapse it. Please uncollapse. DGG ( talk ) 22:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do. Yworo (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You basically did ok there. It's tricky when you decide to help in one of these thoroughgoing messes :) DGG ( talk ) 16:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Escort Ireland

You can come clean up my mess there now. Thanks! Active Banana (talk) 01:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Nothing much to clean up except a few spaces before ref tags. But wasn't Hanratty the FBI guy in Catch Me If You Can? Or was that Handratty? Guess I'll click my own link and check after posting this :-) Yworo (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

"We'll call him 'Shaun'!"

(Username clarification) I briefly considered making a "This User Shaves His Head" userbox with appropriate graphic in response but . . . ^_^

Community ban discussion for User:100110100

This is an FYI to let you know that the discussion has been moved. WP:AN is the more appropriate location for ban discussions, so the discussion can now be found here. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Economy of the United Kingdom

Ledenierhomme has reverted on the article more than 3 times in a 24 hour period as can been seen from the article's history, hence my warning on Ledenierhomme's talk page. I am not the first to warn Ledenierhomme about 3RR on their talk page. I have attempted to engage with Ledenierhomme plenty of times on the article talk page. If someone is intent on vandalising an article it's a matter of either reverting that vandalism or leaving the article vandalised. I have requested the article be protected twice, which it was, in order to resolve the issue, which has failed due to Ledenierhomme simply vandalising the article once it is unprotected again, hence my seeking outside help. Australisian (talk) 23:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I take offense that you firstly accuse me of reporting a user who is not edit warring, later to admit they were after I stood by my claim, and then to claim I used the 3RR warning to intimidate that user. You have failed to warn Ledenierhomme at all, yet have warned me twice, despite the fact Ledenierhomme has been removing long standing well sourced information from the article without consensus over and over again. I have been restoring the article to its prior version, attempting to engage on the talk page many times, and requested the article be protected twice, which it was. Please ensure you have the facts right in future before making such offensive accusations against me. Australisian (talk) 23:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

And I have reverted the article more than 3 times in a 24 hour period? Australisian (talk) 23:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Tell me, have you warned Ledenierhomme yet? Australisian (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't help but feel you aren't being neutral. You haven't warned Ledenierhomme despite warning me. Australisian (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Curiouser and...

I'm glad someone else thinks so.... Peridon (talk) 23:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

How about Bournei7 (the creator), Jphenigan, and Almightee as well? Not yet reappeared but fit the same editing/disappearing pattern. Peridon (talk) 23:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Nice one anyway... Peridon (talk) 23:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Canadian Arab Federation

The post contains videos of a television program's report on the matter. So I will either repost or simply source The Michael Coren Show and its date. I am doing the former right now. If that is not acceptable then, in good faith, please go ahead and do the latter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HaltonMcSquinty (talk • contribs) 00:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Service award per WP:SERVICE

This editor is a
Yeoman Editor
and is entitled to display this Service Badge.

Herostratus (talk) 03:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Yworo, and welcome to the little club of silly taxes. Thank you for your contribution. I hope you like the place and decide to write more articles on silly taxes.

Luckily, there's not yet a tax on trying to build bridges. :) – B.hotep •talk• 22:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles

I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.

I intend to revise those articles following the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.

Thank you.

Vyeh (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For your calm, logical, and utterly sensible statements at WP:AN/I Jayjg (talk) 00:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Calm and Socratic? Are we talking about the same editor? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

About the Warning

Thank you for your warning, Yworo. That paragraph in the Eli Soriano article has been there for months so I thought it was already an important part of the article. Anyways, thank you for dropping by. IronBreww (chat) 02:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)