Jump to content

User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Des Jarlais: new section
Khadkhall (talk | contribs)
63 edits
→New user help: new section
Line 246: Line 246:


That's clearly still appropriate. – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 20:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
That's clearly still appropriate. – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 20:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

== New user help ==

Hello, I would like to ask your advice on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism this page]. I am doing research on this topic. And the current article might be biased. More specifically it tells the story from the perspective of the mediators, tourism agents and the business in general while the phenomenon is much complex with moral and public health issues. Even the name of the phenomenon widely considered differently ([http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?pid=S0042-96862011000100015&script=sci_arttext&tlng=pt this bulletin of W.H.O mentions partly]). It is actually a marketing name invented by the tourism agents. Then the article has the destinations section which is not so much important to the topic to elapse so much space I think just a table would suffice. Nevertheless I would like to change the article a bit in a way to add more academic information based on journal articles not on business pages. Now, I am new to Wikipedia and I am not familiar with the jargon here. So how do you think I should act in this matter ? Should go ahead and start changing it or contact people who made the previous changes one by one?
Thank you in advance [[User:Khadkhall|Khadkhall]] ([[User talk:Khadkhall|talk]]) 01:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:02, 11 November 2012

And there is also This archive

Autograph of Virchand Gandhi

Dear friend, you recently removed an autograph of virchand gandhi from an article due to ebay resource. Here is a resource, a blog run by great grand son of Virchand Gandhi stating the same signature in an image. Please consider it and if you agree then revert edit. http://virchandgandhi.blog.com/ Regards, --Nizil (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for speedy reply. I will look for better sources. What should I do for already uploaded image? --Nizil (talk) 23:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for your reply. I appriciate your help regarding images. :)

--Nizil (talk) 10:14, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UK channel line up Afd

Just to let you know, I've created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of digital terrestrial television channels (UK) as a further extension of the current debate on channel listings on Wikipedia. Your input would be appreciated doktorb wordsdeeds 17:43, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re-directs and I.P. socks

Hi. First of all, I hope you don't remember me from my high school days, (about five years ago, I believe), because I feel pretty foolish looking back on my teenage years. But, on the subject of this topic, I came across the dispute between several editors, including yourself and this "good guy". I noticed that Floquenbeam proposed a compromise to them, in which they would include a notice on the I.P. page, in exchange for keeping the re-direct. Since nobody has edited since the 9th, I have to ask, is this a legitimate compromise you and the other editors feel is appropriate? DarthBotto talk•cont 00:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the long story has to do with concern about editors being able to easily be able to follow the history of a page that had resulted in delete being lost in userfication and a series of page moves but is no longer relevant because the short story, the content from that page has been merged and the userpage fully deleted and so there is absolutely no concern. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of Fehime Sultan

It is forbidden to gave you this Photo?

Strange... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.115.3 (talk) 19:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


https://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=347519955326470&set=o.56075470861&type=1&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.115.3 (talk) 19:34, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you are talking about, except that you probably need to read WP:COPYRIGHT. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is a Photo of her, and I think...it will be great to put them in the Article: Fehime Sultan Also i found this: http://www.beck-shop.de/Source_Wikipedia-Women-of-Ottoman-Empire/productview.aspx?product=5800044

In this Book, it is said: Fehime had a daughter, called Nemzade Hatice, born 1911- 2000) by Mahmud Bey but this second Marriage wasnt reconized bey her Uncle Mehmed V., so this Girl was not accepted as a ottoman Princess in the Ottoman Dynasty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.115.3 (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fehime Sultan is not an article I have ever worked on and my only knowledge of the subject matter area is some blatant vandal fighting. Nor do I deal with images other than fighting copyright vios.
You would probably get better response contacting someone who has edited the article or the Talk:Fehime Sultan or one of the project groups listed on the talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:42, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop

Removing factual content from Whore of Babylon. Those are facts that do not have to be sourced. Not everything needs a source if it's true, and original research should be ENCOURAGED. ResonX (talk) 15:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to change the policies then. You can start here Wikipedia talk:No original research. But until you achieve consensus to make such changes to the policy, you will need to work within the existing policy, or end up being blocked. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fehime Sultan

I do not want, how I can put the Picture of Fehime in the Article?

Can you please help me?

I have copy the link of her...

Thanky

Perihan S. (talk) 15:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Just, I asked Mr.Niceguy he helped me aout the Photo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fehime_Sultan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perihan S. (talk • contribs) 21:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop - Call detail record

Hi,

Please have a read of deletion policy, particularly WP:ATD-R, "If the change is disputed, an attempt should be made on the talk page to reach a consensus before restoring the redirect.". The article had good references which you deleted as spam https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Call_detail_record&diff=520788957&oldid=520573178, which they are clearly not. The article belongs in Wikipedia and is far from unsuitable. Alex Sims (talk) 03:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have disputed your change of an article being replaced with a redirect without a merge. Can you please attempt to discuss and reach a consensus on the article talk page before reverting to the redirect. Also why have you called reliable sources spam? Please retread WP:ATD-R Alex Sims (talk) 12:18, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted on the talk page and explained there that the links are solely to unusable commercial sites. They are not valid as either reliable sources nor as WP:ELNO external links. And I encourage you to read WP:BURDEN and not restore challenged material without providing valid inline citations. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Making a note here that this user (TheRedPenofDoom) is also making inappropriate edits to the article "Stephanie Cutter". Atxav8r (talk) 18:21, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make this as clear as possible.

I will NEVER accept Wikipedia's current policies. NEVER. I hate them more than any other entity in existence, and if someone were to put a shotgun to my head and order me to embrace Wikipedia's current policies or else die, I would choose the latter. ResonX (talk) 17:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


UUUUGHHH!! What I'm, telling you is: FORGET ABOUT THOSE RULES. DO THE RIGHT THING AND HELP ME GET THEM CHANGED, BECAUSE YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T AGREE WITH THEM. NO ONE DOES. ResonX (talk) 18:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You probably should not take up a career as a mind reader as your ability to determine what other people think is not very good. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:04, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that you think those rules are CORRECT?! ResonX (talk) 18:05, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are they "correct" rules creating a fansite where anyone can write whatever they want? No they arent. BUT Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and the rules are very good at guiding the creation of reliable encyclopedic content. So for the purpose of what Wikipedia is and should be, yes, i think the rules are, indeed, pretty much CORRECT -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The correct rules would be a reasonable compromise, where everything is governed by common sense, and inclusion, rather than exclusion, is the default. ResonX (talk) 18:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedia content is NOT created by wide open inclusion. It is created by carefully graded and examined inclusion and broadly excluding crap. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Using 'Year Month' is wrong

Don't disrespect fellow editors. This is obvious a content issue not a deletion issue. Concerning Romnesia there is nothing inherently wrong with reverting an incorrectly applied redirect. Articles in AfD should either remain or be deleted. AfD is not AfR. 85.170.164.197 (talk) 19:39, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huh wah? The fate of Romnesia was determined by an AfD discussion. You do not get to summarily over-ride that consensus decision because you disagree. You are free to remove the notice attached to your IP page about the inappropriate action, but it will be considered as full acknowledgment that you have been forwarned of consequences of future similar behavior. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is there was zero consensus. The AfD is plainly obvious in this regard. The closing admin decided to make a content decision as the redirect shows. This is also where you are wrong. 85.170.164.197 (talk) 19:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is your personal decision to determine whether or not your are going to continue to attempt to personally over-ride the closure. But if you do, expect that you will be blocked from editing. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Neal Purvis and Robert Wade

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Food Composition Database

Food composition database Dear RedPenofDoom,

The list of global food composition databases was removed by yourself, but as food composition databases are reference sources themselves the global sources just expands and adds to the this huge area. The more data avaialble on food composition the stronger the data actually is as food composition can be so varied across the world.

Please consider its value and allow me to add it back in.

Thanks

HelenaNutrition (talk) 11:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, please can you direct me to the guidelines you refer to for listing links. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelenaNutrition (talk • contribs) 12:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual play

The death of people that live an unusual life isn't unusual by association. "Homeless guy dies of exposure" is barely worth commenting on.—Kww(talk) 15:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

very true.
as I make my first pass through the list to review the sources, however, I am being very generous in my application of WP:OR and not removing anything that has some type of allusion to "unusual"; leaving that battle for later as we appeared to be coming to a consensus of "multiple sources" which would eliminate without question most of the content in the current version.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For a clear and undaunted fight against arrogance and maliciousness by editors for whom the only purpose they have for being here is vandalism. Long may you defend the project and your talk page against terse insult and frustrating stubbornness. doktorb wordsdeeds 15:29, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Description of P.K Abdul Aziz

Hello redpenofdoom,

The information that Abdul Azis had to resign because of the CBI enquiry is entirely false. I request you to go through the reference that you yourself have posted and clarify. Please refer this link: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-01-11/india/30615322_1_pk-abdul-azis-cbi-amu-court

In the report it is clearly stated that CBI would take a "Final view" of the so called "allegations" later. It is no where stated that he had to resign because of this enquiry. He completed his term gracefully and demitted office. Please refer this link of the report where he is handing over charge to the next VC.

[1] [2]

So, it can not be said that he had to "resign" and leave "unceremoniously".

Thanks,

Infinitebliss77 (talk) 18:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello redpenofdoom,

I agree that you have not stated that he has not resigned because of the enquiry. But the truth of the matter is that he has not resigned at all. According to the Aligarh Muslim University Statutes, Section 2:

"The Vice Chancellor shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office" and '"Notwithstanding anything contained in the above clause, a person appointed as Vice Chancellor shall, if he completes the age of 65years during the term of his office or any extension thereof, retire from office"'

Please refer this link: [3] Please go to About us-->Policies and Procedures (University Acts and Statutes)--> Page number 23 and 24 (Section 2, Clauses 4 and 5).

As you have stated, Prof Azis would have completed 5 years by June 2012. But he completed 65 years first, on January 18th, 2012. So, in accordance with Section 2, Clause 5, he demitted his office one day before that is on January 17th 2012. Reference for that is already provided.

So, I request you to please stop using the word resign, as it would be insulting to a person such as him, who had occupied this position of national importance.

Thanks, Infinitebliss77 (talk) 06:18, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

we do not base article content upon our interpretation of the universities rules. we follow what the sources say. the sources say he left office early under the cloud of the investigations. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:40, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please cite your sources where it is explicitly stated that he had to leave early under the cloud of the investigations----Infinitebliss77 (talk) 09:09, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Net channels AFD

Hiya, Red Pen. I am contacting you because you recently left a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3rd bundle of channel lineups. I have just created another AfD, nominating List of Net channels for deletion. If you are interested, you can leave a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Net channels. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 03:13, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{wikify}}

Hi! In case you didn't know, the {{wikify}} template has been deprecated which means we're not supposed to use it any more. Regards, benzband (talk) 17:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Cutter

Your cherry picking and POV presentation of content at Stephanie Cutter is not appropriate. And edit warring to continually delete it is absolutely not acceptable. Atxav8r (talk) 18:45, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should be aware that removal of inappropriate BLP content is an activity specifically exempted from 3RR. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:58, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the notification of the incident that Atxav8r claims to have made? I was going to add my support for TRPoD's actions but I cannot find any such report. Meters (talk) 19:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I havent seen anything either, maybe he is talking about the Cutter talk page? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems bizarrely self-referential to write "Have fwd'd this issue for resolution." if that mention is the only place the issue is raised. Smells like a red herring. Please let me know if this issue ever does get raised. (I assume such a request avoids any possible accusation of canvassing.) Meters (talk) 20:06, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

United States House of Representatives elections in Tennessee, 2012

In three edits in quick succession, you removed over a kilobyte of information from the article, two edits one edit of which were was labled "c/e". That's not copyediting, that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Bearian (talk) 16:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

two of the 3 edits have summaries of what was done. the one labeled c/e [1] entirely falls within "copy edit" removal of non encyclopedic non-content. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Admitted, yes, it was one c/e edit. My point is this: please use better edit summaries. I am not reverting your edits, but instead updated it with an AP analysis. Bearian (talk) 21:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will absolutely stand by this edit and identifying it as "irrel to the campaign article" and I will stand by removing WP:SYN with this edit under the edit summary of "didnt see anything mentioning the impact on tickets down the line, let alone this particular race". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: wasn't that the point?

I'm not sure it was the point, but maybe. I mean, I think the entire essay is missing the point of IAR (not to mention a far too misleading and unintuitive shortcut), bu tthat's just me. If he's trying to make a point with an absurdly verbose nutshell (I mean, "metaphorical antipathy"?) maybe it's better off unmade. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:52, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish people

Will you please stop removing my edits. Its fustrating as I am trying to merege certain sections and my edits keep being erased through edit conflicts. If you had a look at the discussion page you would understand what I am doing right now.Turco85 (Talk) 12:39, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I removed certain content, but I had not yet finished my edits! Hence, most of it was going to be placed back, but everytime I try to save the page I get an edit conflict. Can you just wait a few minutes to see what I'm actually doing.Turco85 (Talk) 12:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Talk:Family of Barack Obama#Removal of attributed content from two reliable sources.
Message added 19:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Strange symbol

In this edit, why did you replace hyphens with this bizarre symbol: � ??? Cresix (talk) 02:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oops. my browser is doing a weird auto-replace for some symbols. i missed that. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

“Leonardo” versus “da Vinci”

Hi there. I notice you've been changing instances of “Leonardo” to “da Vinci” on Cultural references to Leonardo da Vinci. Art-historical convention is that he is referred to either as “Leonardo da Vinci” or as “Leonardo”, never “da Vinci”. The name translates to “Leonardo of Vinci” – “da Vinci” isn't a surname, as in more recent times it would be. This is true of some (though not all) other historical figures with “da”, “di”, “della” etc. in their names. (It does vary on a case-by-case basis: Piero della Francesca and Piero di Cosimo follow the rule; Andrea del Verrocchio doesn't.) Ham 13:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oops. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:44, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for changing it back! :) Ham 14:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Debi Gliori

Thanks. Given the deletions you made to the Reception section of Debi Gliori, I would agree with WP:UNDUE. However, please also see the "Undue" sub-section in this ongoing AN/I. It's a very messy and bitter business. Regards, Eric: Esowteric+Talk 07:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have removed the controversy section per WP:UNDUE and added bulleted list to Media reception without comment. People are going to get the wrong idea about the unsubstantiated allegations of IP theft, however. Esowteric+Talk 08:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

india-forums.com

At a recent WP:RSN discussion you indicated you support blacklisting of india-forums.com. I've therefore submitted such a proposal at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#india-forums.com, so feel free to comment there. —Psychonaut (talk) 12:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Des Jarlais

I'm going to suggest that the template of "activepol" be reworded. Adding activepol=yes adds the article to Category:Active politicians, which says

"Active" means that the politician is in the media's eye enough for there to be an increased risk of vandalism or more sophisticated pro- and anti- PR edits to the attached article.

That's clearly still appropriate. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New user help

Hello, I would like to ask your advice on this page. I am doing research on this topic. And the current article might be biased. More specifically it tells the story from the perspective of the mediators, tourism agents and the business in general while the phenomenon is much complex with moral and public health issues. Even the name of the phenomenon widely considered differently (this bulletin of W.H.O mentions partly). It is actually a marketing name invented by the tourism agents. Then the article has the destinations section which is not so much important to the topic to elapse so much space I think just a table would suffice. Nevertheless I would like to change the article a bit in a way to add more academic information based on journal articles not on business pages. Now, I am new to Wikipedia and I am not familiar with the jargon here. So how do you think I should act in this matter ? Should go ahead and start changing it or contact people who made the previous changes one by one? Thank you in advance Khadkhall (talk) 01:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.ummid.com/news/2012/January/16.01.2012/farewell_to_amu_vc.htm
  2. ^ http://ummid.com/news/2012/January/17.01.2012/mehdi_abbas_rizvi_new_vc.htm
  3. ^ http://ss1.amu.ac.in/index.jsp
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom&oldid=522410233"