User talk:Zad68

A barnstar for you

		The Modest Barnstar
		In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.2.142 (talk) 15:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Comparison of web search engines

Hello, Zad68. You have new messages at Talk:Comparison of web search engines.
Message added 17:54, 2 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

P.S.: please, don't leave me {{talkback}} – I watch that page. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:17, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

3O

Hey, Zad, thanks for providing a third opinion! Just keep in mind that, when you do give one, please remove its entry from third opinion page. In fact, I usually remove the entry before even posting the 3O, so that I don't duplicate efforts with other people who see the posting while I compose my reply. Don't worry about it for now; I removed it for you. Just keep it in mind for the future. Thanks again! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for Redirecting the "Poitier Meets Plato" article for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AQuixoticLife (talk • contribs) 03:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	Thanks for redirecting the "Plato Meets Poitier" article for me. AQuixoticLife (talk) 04:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks

WikiThanks

You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.7.204 (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Isaiah 7:14

As you've recently edited, ould you like to have a look at what I've done with this article and tell me any changes you think are necessary? PiCo (talk) 05:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I finally took a look at it, and I'd say you should be very proud of the serious progress you have made with the article. I'm most impressed with the sourcing, the cited sources are first-rate. However, I am not sure that the article accurately represents the sources. For example, the article says "The word almah has no exact equivalent in English: it meant a young girl of child-bearing age, i.e., one who has just entered puberty." and cites Childs 2001, p. 66., but on that page Childs goes on to explain that an almah is "a female sexually ripe for marriage," and that in most cases an almah does describe a woman who is not only "sexually ripe for marriage" but also a virgin as well. Defining almah in the lede with: "almah (young woman)" is oversimplifying to the point of misrepresentation and will probably get challenged. Regarding the wording of the article, it could use a little fiddly copy-editing but nothing major. Hope my feedback is helpful! Zad68 (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's very helpful, and thanks for taking the time to comment. I'll look into the points you raise tonight. PiCo (talk) 03:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Zad, among other things I think it is objectionable that PiCo removed most of the material from the work, including a lot of good discussion on the exegesis of the verse. Could you take a look at the article before the edits and see if you agree?Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Quark I will look. I did notice that, but I also think I remember that the original exegesis that was removed wasn't well-supported with good sources. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I'll look, thanks for drawing my attention to it. Zad68 (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Richters study

Thanks for providing a link to that study. I thought I had a copy of it, but it didn't look familiar (perhaps my memory's failing — at 34 I'm getting old!). Anyway, a mid-90s study of Australian men would see a strong correlation between age and circumcision status (since circ rates dropped over time). So my guess is that the difference was due to simple confounding: younger men tend to have slightly larger penises as they have more testosterone (and are less prone to conditions such as ED that can cause shrinkage). This is OR, of course, so I won't say anything at the article, but I thought it was interesting. Jakew (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Lol... if you are "getting old" at 34, what hope is there for me?? You bring up a good point as to why we have such high standards for medical claims.... and anyway now that we have the original study we can discuss that and throw out that anti-circumcision conference proceedings book. Zad68 (talk) 16:52, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your thorough research, and lucid and logical comments. Jayjg (talk) 01:02, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Since you've been involved in related discussions, I thought you might like to be aware of Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Circumcision. Best wishes, Jakew (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Jake. Zad68 (talk) 13:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

You've yet to actually weigh-in on the evidence, merely commenting on how mediation is going. I was expecting some research out of you, as happened on the talk page. Rip-Saw (talk) 23:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Rip-Saw, thank you for your high expectations of me, I take it as a compliment. I'll look, but as I mentioned on the DRN thread, I don't think we're going to get to consensus either there or on the article Talk page. I'm not sure what to do next. The DRN Clerk on the DRN thread mentioned that if consensus isn't achieved, whatever change is proposed won't stand. I did spend some time today trying to figure out what the previous consensus was on whether the "African men" qualifier should be added to the lead sentence, and as far as I can tell, a case can be made that the previous consensus was the sentence without the qualifier, and so those who are looking to add the qualifier would not have consensus to do so. I know, it's a cop-out, and avoids the true challenge of mounting an unassailable case, but it definitely appears there are two "camps" about this issue with no middle ground. Based on the amount of text already typed on the subject, I'm not sure I see consensus ever happening. I haven't been convinced that trying to achieve consensus on adding the qualifier is the best use of my Wikipedia time. Zad68 (talk) 00:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

ArticleSabotage

You've erased vital information about lawsuits involving the Mogen clamp from Mogen clamp. Please restore my original format. (MurasakiSunshine (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2012 (UTC))

I addressed this with MurasakiSunshine at Talk:Mogen clamp; MurasakiSunshine apologized "for claiming [I] vandalized the Mogen clamp page". Zad68 (talk) 13:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

AN/I notification re: Blanket removals of refs as "Not RS per RSN"

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Blanket_removals_of_refs_as_.22Not_RS_per_RSN.22_.28Moved_from_WP:RS.2FN.29. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I will look. Zad68 (talk) 13:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I was reluctant to raise it at ANI because I really don't want to make this a personal issue against an editor, but surely we can find a better way to handle "de-RSing" a site with a large number of cites. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I replied at the AN/I. That was difficult. This is an editor behavior issue involving disruptive editing and should be treated as such. What he is doing isn't the issue as much as how he is going about doing it. Zad68 (talk) 14:50, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution advice

The two other parties are yet to respond with their views, and I certainly do not wish to undermine this dispute resolution process by precipitously implementing suggested changes. At what stage may I proceed with other editors' advice and effect these changes?
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 20:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't have too much experience with DRN, but I would definitely wait at least a day for their input. If the other parties don't respond on the thread within a day, I would put (additional) Talkback notices on their User pages reminding them about the discussion. Someone who clerks DRN and notices that discussion has stopped will probably close it. My little experience with DRN is that you don't really get a decision, like you might want. You'll get input from other editors, encouragement to come to consensus, and then (maybe) an evaluation from a DRN clerk that you have or have not reached consensus. That's it. Zad68 (talk) 20:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you for your input and assistance.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 21:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

CBraro

Vaffanculo! How can you say that what I added was a lie?

It is a small page, and I AM FROM THE VILLAGE, you do not know anything about them so why do you lie and remove it?

Idiotaaaa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.12.102.190 (talk) 15:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, the edit you added to Colobraro was: "A famous superstition within local villages is to touch the genitals if one mentions the village in any form, as if to prevent any bad luck occuring to the individuals involved," without any source. The sentence you added seems highly unlikely to be true, but it is possible that it is true. If it is true, then you need to add a reference to a reliable source backing up your statement, and also if it is true, please accept my apologies for tagging it as vandalism. I try to be very careful with tagging vandalism, and I do indeed do research before tagging something questionable as vandalism. I did searches on "Colobraro superstition" and although I found that the town does indeed have superstitions, there was nothing about "touching the genitals." However I am only human, I am not 100% perfect, and I occasionally make mistakes. Also, please review assume good faith--your addition looked like vandalism, and my revert of your edit was only intended to improve the encyclopedia. And there is no reason to call me an "idiot," or say I "lie." Thank you. Zad68 (talk) 15:44, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry it is because this computer is shared by many individuals using an out of country networking system in kent, and our mac addresses/ips are all the same — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.12.102.190 (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, please consider creating your own account to use to edit Wikipedia. Zad68 (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Not sure why

Not sure why, but lately everyone seems to have a little bit of Wiki-stress. I cannot seem to say anything without someone leaving a closing comment contrary to anything that I say. I am not here to argue, but to explain what I meant by nobility and then move on and enjoy editing Wikipedia. That is why I am coming to your page as opposed to keeping this in the public realm. I completely understand the guidelines and what you are saying (which by the way are guidelines, not law and Common Sense often needs to take their place - NO, I do not want to argue this point like we are arguing nobility). By the way, I am used to being beat over the head as I am also a lawyer in real life (gaming lawyer nonetheless) so no need to apologize about that. First, the article itself is notable. There is significant coverage, but there is a lack of independent coverage that I have found when trying to search as it is clouded up with affiliate links. This is common with other topics as well which is why I am trying to improve the article (Not argue nobility). If you fell the article is not worthy, you can recommend merge or deletion. I have no issue with that. I just don't know the reason for all of the Wiki beating lately (not you personally, but you happened to be the person I vented on - So THANKS, and SORRY!). --Morning277 (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Morning277, regarding "There is significant coverage, but there is a lack of independent coverage"--isn't "independent coverage" exactly what Wikipedia requires? Is it possible you are too close to the subject to evaluate its coverage relative to Wikipedia policies objectively? Hopefully just planting a seed for thought. I have no plans to follow you around and argue with you or try to get the articles you are interested in deleted, I'm just concerned about the apparent disconnect with what you're describing and what Wikipedia says. Am I missing something? (I know I know... "common sense"! :P ) Anyway, thanks for the beer! Sure could use one. Zad68 (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I like to keep an open mind when evaluating content. I am definitely not "too close" to the topic and online gaming is not legal in the United States (the states have the right to do it but no one as of yet has established any regulations to allow it). I am actually more of an expert on the topic of gaming which is why I would be more suitable to edit the article than someone who just came by and wanted to add a citation (which is what brought us here in the first place - someone placing a link where it should not have been). As far as Wiki-stress, I am far from it. I just happen to see it from a lot of people lately. Have you seen the same (obviously you see it from me)? Seems like every article that I stumble upon there are people arguing the nobility of the article, the objectivity of a citation, the formatting of headings, etc. Seems like people have gone crazy over the past week. I don't know, maybe it's just me. Have fun, see ya around. --Morning277 (talk) 14:24, 8 May 2012 (UTC) P.S.-You're not missing anything. You are correct with your contention. We are probably just on opposite ends of the spectrum with how we view the guidelines. This is what happens in most cases involving "disputes" such as these.

A beer for you!

AND ONE ON ME!!!! Morning277 (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Disruptive IP

Hi, you may have realised that an IP address was vandalising your talk page. I have been rollbacking their edits and they persisted. I thought I'd inform you that they have been blocked from editing for 31 hours after I reported them at WP:AIV. If you have any more problems or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks - --Chip123456 (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the alcoholic beverage :) --Chip123456 (talk) 19:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Stalker?

Someone stalking you? :) [1] --Morning277 (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

LOL! Maybe I'll leave that one! Zad68 (talk) 18:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Using Huggle

You may want to be more careful, you just reverted an IP who removed some vandalism and then told them their edit wasn't beneficial. Nev1 (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Darn it!! And I do try to be so careful! I will investigate and fix, including apologizing. Thanks for catching. Zad68 (talk) 15:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

These things happen, I hadn't even noticed when the vandalism was first included over a month ago. Nev1 (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

User subpages and MfD

Please don't use MfD to delete your unwanted subpages - just tag them with {{db-userreq}} instead, then it's less work for everyone (particularly the admin deleting your subpages who then has to close the deletion discussion as well). Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 17:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Same applies for RfD, incidentally. Bencherlite^Talk 17:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry about the wrong template, this was the first time requesting this and I'll get it right in the future. Appreciate your help! Zad68 (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Polygnostic Morphism

This user is a Polygnostic Morphist

... just for you ;P Pesky (talk) 06:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Made me laugh

I happened to see this edit on my watchlist. I'm not certain if it was your intent, but I found it very funny. Jakew (talk) 10:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

First thing I saw when I clicked on you! Yes, had me in stitches, too! Pesky (talk) 02:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 22:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Circumcision

Hello Zad68, You reverted an entire section with many different editors post. If you do not believe a particular post should go on a talk page ask that editor to revert it and explain why or go to their talk and discuss. Its considered extremely bad form to revert other users talk page post unless they are serious BLP or legal violations. Garycompugeek (talk) 14:50, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Gary, first I did not 'revert' or remove anything. All the text everybody contributed was still on the page, and was easily made visible by clicking on the [show] link. What I did was attempt to stop the growth of the several threads within the section that are clearly off-topic per Wikipedia's talk page guidelines. Those threads are non-constructive regarding improvements to article, and are clearly heading into dangerous WP:NPA territory. You reverted my closure of the section, so you now bear some responsibility for the continued existence of those threads on the talk page. Do you think those threads were constructive, related to improvements of the article, and within Wikipedia's talk page guidelines? I will await your answer here. Thanks. Zad68 15:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the nomenclature, please substitute hide for revert. It doesn't matter what I think, or anyone else for that matter. These are established editors not drive by IP's. Next time just post please stay on topic and/or talk to the editor on their user talk page, ask them to revert or strike out a comment if you feel it is inappropriate. Garycompugeek (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, WP:TALK indicates that it's appropriate to remove off-topic comments ("Keep discussions focused on how to improve the article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal."). Hiding them in a collapsible box seems entirely appropriate. Jakew (talk) 17:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Zad68, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki Comparison to other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Orphan Wiki (talk) 09:21, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

hi, Zad68, Glancing through the article history I came across this edit by you, so thought of informing you, STiki does not revert or do edits by itself, until and unless you press the "Vandalism" button. would you elaborate what actually had happened over there? regards--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 09:40, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry forgot to reply. I understand what STiki is supposed to do and not do, but I only used STiki to make like 2-3 vandalism evaluations and reversions, just as a test, and it did that revert. Honestly, I do not remember being shown an edit on that page to review, so after my 2-3 edit reviews and reversions, I was fairly stunned to see it in my contribs. It wasn't like I had been using STiki for an hour and reviewed hundreds of edits--I only did a few to try it out. That's the best explanation I have, sorry. Zad68 16:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• ok, although that is a bit unusual but I believe you. Perhaps this might have happened because of the server lag. When you log into Stiki, then it connects to the server and takes a couple seconds depending upon the network speed to connect. It might be possible that you had pressed the revert buttons ( Vandalism, and good faith) even before the diffs were shown to you. And as you had pressed the button the reverts occurred, which was then visible in your contributions. If you want you can give it another try (more patiently) this time, will be glad to hear your response--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 16:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Midtown West - Atlanta

Don't understand why this listing is not allowed. How can we properly create a Wikipedia listing for our company Midtown West? Please visit for verification. Thank you!Midtownwest1 17:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midtownwest1 (talk • contribs)

I have replied at your talk page. Zad68 17:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	y u gonna ban meh? Lulo Flash14245 (talk) 18:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

Dear Zad68:

I feel bound to inform you that you appear to have reverted a recent edit on list of hobbies as a case of vandalism. Furthermore, you have attributed that edit to my ip address. I must therefore inform you that I had never made that edit. I find it disruptive and insulting that someone should make me liable for an action never committed, though not you in particular.

Alex0723alex0723 (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I caused you offense. Are you talking about this edit? I think there is an easy explanation for what happened, and absolutely no offense was meant to you. You must use an ISP that assigns dynamic addresses, and someone else had that IP. Zad68 17:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Pittsburgh Irish Festival wiki-project tags

Thanks for the notice. They were both so wrong. I read "Pittsburgh Irish Festival, Inc. is a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation" and added WikiProject Companies to it. UK!!! I dont know why i did that. Must be still in sleep. Thanks! But in case you come across any more such feel free to change them. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 19:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Ha! Great, thanks for double checking. Zad68 19:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

RE: IP 89.142.23.111

It would appear that the user is edit-warring on LGBT parenting and Homosexuality and psychology. That IP has undone both mine and your reverts, and will probably continue. Please have a look and keep a watch on those articles. Thanks. --112.134.146.122 (talk) 18:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I have already warned the editor about edit-warring and improper accusations of "vandalism". I have watchlisted both articles. I'm waiting to see if the editor will be willing to stop edit-warring and start discussing. Zad68 18:10, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

3 minutes

If you had given me more than 3 minutes you would have seen my response on talk. I would like to discuss this with you - i think our discussion has been very constructive so far - but please wait for the discussion to finish one way or the other before unilaterally removing the tag. Oncenawhile (talk) 16:58, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

That's fine, I saw that you had removed the tag without adding anything new to the POV discussion, but if you're going to add to t::hat discussion, go ahead and put the tag back. In general I don't like the idea of POV or other tags like that left out there forever without active discussion on the Talk page. Zad68 17:00, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

will reply but maybe not today Zad68 20:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

no

how? Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 19:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like we both tried to revert the same vandalism at the same time, my Huggle got it and your Twinkle made no change... no big deal, vandalism is reverted. Zad68 19:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

we bought a zoo.

I am sorry i thought that alison <sam fox> was robin,s<patrick fugit> girlfriend in the movie thank you for fixing the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.8.179.163 (talk) 20:27, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Music Notability Dispute

Please refer to Talk:Austin Thornton for further deliberation. Luna Bars 4 Lyfe (talk) 15:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, already commented there. Zad68 15:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Retired Editors list

Your improvements are fantastic. I know the will be very helpful in my effort to complile instructive eulogies. ```Buster Seven Talk 02:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

If I can assist in some way, feel free to ask. ```Buster Seven Talk 03:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Glad you find it useful! What other data should I pull? Zad68 03:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

From the two or three Ive looked at some editors just leave/retire. No fuss. No muss. No comment. No Ban or Block. They just stop editing and, maybe, put up a retired banner. So....some way to differentiate the "levels" of leaving. From "Get out and don't come back" to "I just don't think we should see each other anymore". I just now noticed the "notes" column. Maybe thats the place. ```Buster Seven Talk 03:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Buster, I have greatly improved the retired editors list page, please take a look at it. I'll try to figure out how to do some the meta-analysis you're describing. Zad68 20:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Greatly improved is an understatement. You are obviously a wizard of some kind. My original plan to lift various "I'm leaving and here's why" comments has moved to the back burner and is on hold (in agreement with Dennis and Cailil). I AM willing to do some investigative research and make entries into the notes column if you think it may have some future value. I do very little via "tools" so I should be done about the end of Obama's second term. Would it be adventageous to remove 1)editors with very few edits, 2)editors with a short lifespan, 3)editors that have abandoned the account to start another.? ```Buster Seven Talk 22:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

"Wiazrd!" Wow, let me get my cape and pointy magic hat! All the "magic" was done in under 200 lines of Python code, which is something I've been trying to teach myself. Actually, I don't have any access to Wikipedia internals and I'm not a Wikipedia tools developer, although I think I'd like to look into that area. My Python script just pulls Web pages and scrapes the data out of them, and dumps the results into a Wikitable. I'll review the results and do some editing as you suggest. It should be easy to remove the accounts that have less than like 100 edits, are perma-blocked vandals who for some reason have a retired template on their account (maybe as a joke?), etc. I really would like to use the results to find a list of "good" editors who have wandered away, to ask them why they left and also to possibly encourage them to return. Zad68 14:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like your on the right road. Good luck! ```Buster Seven Talk 14:14, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

TheTeamwork Barnstar

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Your efforts to move the Retention Project off square one and moving forward are appreciated. ```Buster Seven Talk 14:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!! Zad68 16:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC) +1, I've been beaten to it. Penyulap ☏ 00:04, 26 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I'm counting it twice.  :) Zad68 18:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikidata

Hi Zad,

Regarding your comment on Wikipedia:Authority control integration proposal/RFC, you might be interested in the ongoing Wikidata project - in the long run, it should hopefully surpass per-project systems like this one. Andrew Gray (talk) 08:59, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Andrew, awesome, yes that's the kind of thing I was looking for! Thanks for the pointer. Zad68 20:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Voters' Rights Amendment Tags

Zad, I appreciate your comments on the Talk Page of the Voters' Right Amendment article and have hopefully addressed them to your satisfaction with additional sources and reference to an uncopyrighted copy of the Amendment. Please see Talk Page responses and clear tabs as appropriate. The USVRA is a new, but rapidly growing movement that should be noticed on Wikipedia. Thanks, Historian2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historian2010 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Still hoping to hear back from you Zad regrding resolution of your concerns. Historian2010 (talk) 13:57, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, have been caught up in other things, I'll look today. Cheers... Zad68 13:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Will reply at your talk page. Zad68 15:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

My answer

Hi Zad, I have responded to your question on my talk page. Thanks.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Circumcision

I put in 3 references to the talk section supporting that the decision was "minor bodily injury" and does not apply to other courts. Please check it out and make an appropriate decision. --Activism1234 13:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Zad68 16:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

That list

ϢereSpielChequers is offering you a Wiki Beer! Liquid refreshment promotes WikiHarmony and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the harmony by offering a beer to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Best served refrigerated (not applicable in England). Temperature and Alcoholic strength varies according to age, religion and geographic location of recipient, US residents below the age of 21 are best advised to keep this beerstar until travelling in a country with less ageist drinking laws. NB This Beerstar is compatible with all known fake IDs

Thanks for changing it to resolve one of my concerns. ϢereSpielChequers 21:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

You're a mensch!

		The Mensch's Barnstar
		Hereby awarded for constructive intervention in the Dave Days AfC / WP:DRV saga David_FLXD (Talk) 10:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Todah! Zad68 14:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Response

I have tried to correct the things you complained about. There are numerous links to the CIRP on wikipedia so I was surprised that you did not like that.

Sugarcube73 (talk) 18:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

thanks for taking this seriously I'm traveling now but will look later, would like to talk with you about this a bit more. Zad68 19:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Under construction tags

They're not magic immunity banners which stop any article getting deleted. As far as I can see with the circumcision procedure article, obvious content fork is obvious, but we'll see. Why can't the material just be added to the circumcision article? Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 22:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Because circumcision is already too big. OK, ok... Check out Talk:Circumcision. We just had an RFC where it was decided to spin out some of the detail from the surgical procedure part of Circumcision to its own article, Circumcision surgical procedure. Doc James (our chief resident maintainer of WP:MEDICINE) recommended starting this article for those who want all the gory details about the procedure, including surgical photos. Circumcision is written in Wikipedia:Summary style and the natural progression is to do this. We are doing this part of WP:Content forking: "On the other hand, as an article grows, editors often create Summary style spin-offs or new, linked article for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage." The paradigm Doc James gave us was Ingrown toenail and Surgical treatment of ingrown toe nails. Good? Zad68 22:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to explain. Given the lack of consensus at the RfC I'm sure you can understand my actions. Sorry if I seemed like I was jumping the gun, it's just that whilst on NPP I've seen the under construction banner used like blood on the door at passover often enough to have become sceptical of its usage. Anyway, appeals to authority rarely carry weight with me but Doc James does tend to know what he's talking about! Good luck with the article. Let me know if you need any help. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 22:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Heh, nice simile! Now, begone ye Angel of Death!  ;) And warning you I may take you up on your offer for help. Cheers... Zad68 22:43, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Circumcision and Law

I have always understood NPOV that different viewpoints should be represented without favoring any one viewpoint. In constructing the Canada sub-section, I prevented three different viewpoints without favoring any one viewpoint, that of Bouclin, the CPSBC, and the Court of appeal of British Columbia. I fail to see why this does not meet the test of NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarcube73 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I will respond on your Talk page, let's continue this conversation there to keep it all in one place. Zad68 16:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Many thanks for getting involved with medical articles. Your efforts are really appreciated. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 17:32, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Careful now, you know all that'll do is encourage me! Cheers! Zad68 18:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Circumcision

Looks like your efforts to improve the article are going well. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 18:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for the work at circumcision. I'm impressed by both the well-written style and your calm approach on the talk page of such a controversial article. Thank you. Pass a Method talk 13:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Very much appreciated! Cheers... Zad68 14:09, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Legend of Korra

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Legend of Korra. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Google searches and numbers

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Google searches and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bloody Christmas

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bloody Christmas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Eduardo López Bustamante

Thanks for your comment.

I am just helping to translate the page into English and I would very much appreciate if you tell me where exactly you perceived the error. I could corret it at once.

So far I just follow the text in Spanish. Can you please tell me which sentences need to be changed?

I will stop my cooperation on translating to English right now, untill I receive your answer. It´s no idea to continue working on something that is not correct--213.89.96.233 (talk) 14:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I will respond at the article Talk page. Zad68 14:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hope Christian School

Hello. Hope Christian School has been the target of much controversy recently in the local media. I am attempting to place information (that is verifiable) out so that those involved (including the media and the curious public) can be better informed. Sandigwilliams has been working with me to better this article.

143.120.99.10 (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2012 (UTC)Alumnusalum

Please comment on Talk:God

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:God. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Wiki voice

The reason y subjective content in the wiki voice is because people argue and it is not absolute. Like "Eric Clapton is the greatest guitarist of all time" when everyone knows its Slash! But here everyone agrees it is antisemitic - which source argues? is this still just one persons view even if this is not in doubt?Crystalfile (talk) 20:09, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You sort of answer your own question... Who argues? Nableezy argues!  :) Generally, if an article tries to say something in Wikipedia's voice, and it gets challenged (like Nableezy did), the sources better be very strong, otherwise it'll probably get moved out of Wikipedia's voice and attributed to a source.

So how strong are the sources? The NY Daily News characterized it as "anti-Semitic". How many others did? YNetNews said "anti-Israel" and not "anti-Semitic." DigitalJournal carries user-supplied content and does not look like a reliable source. JPost doesn't say "anti-Semitic." The Blaze doesn't look like a reliable source and doesn't say "anti-Semitic." So, really, of the ones you brought, only NY Daily News. That's not strong enough.

I think there is a better case to instead have Wikipedia say "anti-Israel" instead of "anti-Semitic." Consider that. Zad68 20:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

But other describe it is as the "kill the jews" rally. If this is not antisemitic what is? Maybe calling it "kill the jews rally" is better supported? Crystalfile (talk) 21:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

We have to go with what the sources say. If the sources don't say it was a "kill the Jews" rally, Wikipedia shouldn't try to say it was. Again, review the sources. I think it would be supported to characterize it as an "anti-Israel" rally. I haven't really exhaustively looked at the sources to support this, you'll have to do that, but that is what I'd look at.

Beyond that, I am troubled by your involvement at this article and a couple of others, and your interaction with Nableezy. It appears that you're engaging in some WP:BATTLEGROUND activity, instead of building a general encyclopedia. The two things that I've seen that support this are 1) the really WP:UNDUE edits at the Ahmed el-Tayeb to describe this one rally he attended one day in this way, and making no other edits to this BLP biography article; and 2) the tit-for-tat AFD nominations. I can tell you that this approach to Wikipedia will lead to a difficult and probably short editing career here. It's up to you to decide how you want to spend your time here, but you should be aware of the probable outcome of the current path you're on. Zad68 14:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Copyright in foreskin article

Zad:

You have made a mistake. Copyright is not at issue here.

Sugarcube73 (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I will reply at the article Talk page, in the mean-time, because WP:CPVIO is a serious issue, I'm going to revert the article edit until we're both clear on whether there's a copyright issue or not. Zad68 16:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Harassment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Croatian Liberation Movement

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Croatian Liberation Movement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Regnerus study

Given your earlier interest, perhaps you'd care to comment at Talk:LGBT parenting#Regnerus follow up Thanks. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 16:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, I'll add it to my work list. Zad68 18:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Beef Products Inc.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Beef Products Inc.. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Why External Linked Removed?

Hi,

I am not sure why External link removed because i feel it's required for an encyclopedia. It lets everyone know about volunteering in Kerela which can be used as a reference to local NGO's. Something similar you can found on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korzok_Monastery, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patiala and http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladakh

Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisyhall (talk • contribs) 18:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Daisy, please read WP:LINKSTOAVOID, WP:LINKSPAM and WP:NOT. A link to information about volunteering in Kerala doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for external links for the general article about Kerala. The fact that similar improper links exist in other articles doesn't make it right. Sorry... Zad68 18:24, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ramadan

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ramadan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)/South Georgia (U.S. state) task force

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)/South Georgia (U.S. state) task force. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Sugarcube73 and circumcision

Hi, Zad68. I know that you expressed concern about Sugarcube73's pro-foreskin POV editing. I also have concerns about his editing and wanted to know if you are keeping a close eye on his edits at the Foreskin, Medical analysis of circumcision‎, Sexual effects of circumcision and any other articles closely related to circumcision.

Take this edit, for example. Do Masters and Johnson really not qualify for this material? Even with the study not being peer-reviewed, they are pioneers in the sexual field, including having debunked some sexual myths, and it's not like this circumcision research is attributed to anyone other than them. 109.123.115.21 (talk) 18:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)