User talk:SQGibbon

13 june 2013 Removal of Selmer guitar post: I've posted a link and details of Selmer 647 for fellow enthusiasts to enjoy, why you think this might be unsuitable is beyond me. Please reinstate the link. These are pictures of a very ate and unusual instrument. The blog in which it featured is a non commercial information blog. NKForster — Preceding unsigned comment added by NKForster (talk • contribs) 18:02, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Anthony Pettis

I'm not sure if you reverted it based upon having never seen Anthony Pettis in action but Showtime IS his nickname. He has it tattooed on his back, is referred often as only "Showtime", and has it announced as part of his time everytime he fights. CMCyantist (talk) 21:13, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I see, I even agree on your point on the positioning of the nickname, to clear up a few things, I wasn't edit warring, the person previously added a nickname he had never used, thinking it was vandalism and that style of positioning was the norm on those articles. Thanks for clearing this up and will use your suggestion in future :) CMCyantist (talk) 22:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

69.198.195.106 (vandal)

I have reason to believe that the person with the IP 69.198.195.106 is a vandal. He recently erased the entirety of the MasterChef Season 4 page for no reason (thank goodness for the undo option). I saw that you had had a similar problem with him in the past and I wanted to make you aware that it was not an isolated incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.59.57 (talk) 18:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Lee Harvey Oswald

I'm a little unclear on why you felt Lee Harvey Oswald didn't belong on the Wikipedia list of different Oswald's. There was a section specifically about people associated with the name Oswald, which was where I added him. You wrote, "These are both contained within the disambiguation pages linked to just above." But I wasn't able to find the link that I believe you're saying already exists somewhere on that page. Currently, anyone typing in "Oswald" (who might be unfamiliar with Lee Harvey Oswald's first name) gets taken to that page, and yet that page has no clear link to, arguably, the most infamous Oswald. Ideas, suggestions, comments would be appreciated as I definitely feel that there needs to be some kind of clear link to Lee Harvey Oswald's wikipedia page from the Oswald page. Thanks. Chrisbat92024 (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC) Chrisbat92024 Chrisbat92024 (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC) -- PS. I'm not totally familiar with how users are supposed to discuss edits on wikipedia. If you have a page to some kind of standard protocol, please feel free to write it on my talk page.

Continuum and TV:MOS

Hi, you reverted my edit with "As per MOS:TV we should only list English-language broadcasts. If this is in English then please add it back". The broadcast is indeed in English (with optional subtitles), but MOS:TV seems to actually say "Apart from the channel of origin for the series, editors are encouraged to instead detail English-speaking countries that the series appears through prose form.". Doesn't this mean that it should not be added back and instead even the already-existing Belgium-specific sentence be removed, since Belgium is not an English-speaking country? Please advise on whether to add my edit back or remove the 2BE mention. Thanks. Anssi (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

American vs. British

I do agree that the symbols to set off quotes (" vs ') can be stylistic, but I think this paragraph was specifically speaking of styles of punctuation (i.e. whether to place the periods or commas inside the quote or outside of it) rather than styles of quotation. On an unrelated note (unless this is what you meant), David Foster Wallace taught at my college, so I do wonder what style he graded his students on (and what style he was published in)! When I took my freshman seminar at Pomona College (a class he would have taught as a Roy E. Disney Professor of Creative Writing and English Professor), my Canadian professor stressed that even the international students had to get used to American standard and lectured us on the differences. I really think that in formal writing, we have one standard. JustAMuggle (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

It's time that we stop using the unsourced and ambiguous phrase "some Americans use British style" quotation punctuation (a.k.a. "logical quotation"). In English-speaking North America, British style quotation punctuation is a decidedly minority practice, the overwhelming majority of American and Canadian style guides endorse the continued use of American style, and you count the number ofi American professional publications that use British style on one hand (at last count, two -- the journals of the Linguistic Society of America and the American Chemical Society). Because virtually all American and Canadian newspapers follow either the AP Style Manual or the CP Style Book, finding an English language North American newspaper that uses British style quotation punctuation is nearly impossible. British style quotation punctuation is not taught in American secondary schools and universities, most Americans are unfamiliar with it, and the overwhelming majority of American academic publications follow either The Chicago Manual of Style or one of the various MLA style guides. In short, the use of British style punctuation in American English is eccentric, odd, and quirky, and does not represent mainstream American or Canadian usage. Any statement that implies that British style is somehow a mainstream or acceptable alternative usage in American English needs to be supported with a sourced footnote or deleted per WP:V and WP:RS. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Spambot

Your nothing but a spambot, don't follow their contributions and then remove necessary content as Original research and needs citations. Not everything has to have those things unless it's available. If you can leave their contributions alone, I'll give you a gift.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 15:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Top Chef and "hair-gate"

Hi SQGibbon, thanks for your message on my talk page. To keep the conversation cohesive, please leave further commentary on the talk page of the subject in question (in this case, Marcel Vigneron). That's where you'll find my response. Thanks.174.17.36.233 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Future fights in MMA records table

I replied on my own talk page regarding this topic. Would you be so kind to check it?SiMntjMMA (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Bill Hicks is Alex Jones Hoax Conspiracy

you are correct that was probably a primary source but the problem is that the secondary source, (lunatic outpost.com)--where I heard about this first today, was also rejected before as an article source although it is not black-listed per se. There are many references to this idea, and seeing as how Hick already had a conspiracy area on the article, I thought that it would fit there.
Here is my problem---what is considered a good source when talking about conspiracy? Do you think that this would be acceptable? http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2013/02/alex-jones-is-bill-hicks.html When I searched earlier, I did find many references to Hicks/Jones death-hoax, and the story appears to have started at a 10th anniversary of Hick's death, where Hick's friends gave Jones an award. That version is also referenced on YouTube and elsewhere but I am wondering what kind of source will be acceptable here?
I don't really care about the teeth business except but that is the most recent variation to the hoax-story. There is older stuff (the award, 10th deathaversary), but I think that the fact that someone who dealt-with conspiracy, is now the subject of one posthumously, is good encyclopedic content for that article.-Thanks for any help you can give with this
24.0.133.234 (talk) 06:32, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Heads up on Pakistani-related socks

Thanks for the work on the Pakistani-related articles. I thought you might want to be aware that there appears to be a large amount of pr-related sockpuppetry going on with these articles, and accounts are being routinely blocked. Because of the large range and dynamic nature of the ip's, not much can can be done about them. See Talk:Humaima_Malick#Note_on_the_edit-warring_by_the_ip.27s_and_new_accounts. If you are aware of any discussions about this on noticeboards or elsewhere, I'd like to know. --Ronz (talk) 01:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

• Thanks for verifying and cleaning up the Puder article as well as others! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

King

Are you really against King having its own article? Because i had posted in its talk page but it seems pretty abandoned now. Turgeis (talk) 22:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

digimon

can you go back and make sure what i just edited on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digimon#Video_games is right

i change the picture because it did not match digimon world 2 or 3 i think i got it right but i need a second opinion --Wjmdem (talk) 04:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hookah

How was the manner in which I presented the information any different than what's already been posted using Encyclopedia Iranica articles? I put the reference link in my post. The information preceding mine was from the same web source and it didn't have quotation marks either. And I was only repeating it because it was in the same context as the other historical information. There's a lot of repetition in the Hookah article, in addition to being poorly written. If I re-post the information with quotation marks, I assume it will be acceptable, correct? --Foreverknowledge (talk) 02:13, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you have no life ?

Do you have nothing better to do other than stalk me on here and revert all my edits for no reason ? 100.40.27.236 (talk) 22:58, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok i guess you dont have anything better to do must be lonely sitting there in your parents basement fat, alone and still a virgin maybe instead of stalking me you should get a job or a girlfriend...something just stop stalking me please. 100.40.27.236 (talk) 23:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Get off your fucking high horse the only reason you keep reverting my edits is so you can push someone around for a second and my edits ohhhhh! goodness i added the fighters reach to the fucking page oh my how controversial like i said stop stalking me it seems i was right about you well everything but the basement as it seems you are homeless you're parents must have thrown you out. 100.40.27.236 (talk) 23:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Damn sounds like you have it rough maybe you should quit i can handle things from here on out. 100.40.27.236 (talk) 00:01, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Ermahgerd da REACH WARS its a conspiracy oh noes !!! whatever will we do against the coming armageddon. 100.40.27.236 (talk) 00:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Seriously try not to be a Dick in the future then we wouldn't have to talk at all. 100.40.27.236 (talk) 00:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

ANI

I didn't ping you in particular but we're at ANI. Stalwart111 05:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm also at 3RR at Freeboard trying to revert yet more of his crap. Stalwart111 06:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

for the helpful info, which I was unaware of previously. It is very much appreciated. Grammarspellchecker (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Briosys

I request you to block user Briosys, because he keeps adding the unreliable source iFlickz, despite repeated warnings not to do so. In fact, he copies text from the source without even rewording them. Due to his adamant nature, I think we better block him. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

An Invitation to Wikiproject Traditional Medicine

I would like to invite you and anyone else whom might be interested, to support wiki project traditional medicine in getting started. The projects goal is to improve coverage on topics of traditional medicine practices; using primarily ethno medical and anthropological journals. Though mostly of anthropological value the support of anyone with biological or cultural knowledge is welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CensoredScribe (talk • contribs) 22:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Voice Cast Vandal

Hi, SQG, I saw your edit here, and I thought that it might be worth mentioning that there is a vandal dubbed "The Voice Cast Vandal", not saying it's the guy you reverted, just heads-up! (Although I know that you've been around a lot longer than I and may probably be well-aware of this dude.) :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

In retrospect, since there's little similarity between the two, I think I totally just wasted your time with unnecessary info. Sorry about that.  :/ Sigh... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong

• Good catch on this revert~! For the record, it is nothing short of that anon IP adding his/her personal opinion without stating any reliable & verifiable sources to back up them in pushing their own agenda. After re-checking, it is my opinion that someone is playing a good hand/bad hand game whilst at it, thus making a sort of sneaky vandalism. And as a side note, I've observed that these clowns' input happens usually around times of CHC's own trial/tribulation (if one can call that that!). Supreme facepalm of destiny... --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 06:32, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

This article, and the people involved in the church, has been a constant target of positive and negative POV-pushing. So much so that now it's not just in my watchlist but I also subscribe to the RSS feed so I don't accidentally miss any changes. It's tiring and a subject I have absolutely no interest in but it's just a magnet for crap. Thanks for catching the other IP edit I missed, usually I'm savvy enough to check all IP edits when reverting but I guess this time I was just lazy or got sidetracked by how hard the latter IP editor tried to make their POV-pushing look legitimate. In the past the article has been a target off-site canvassing on at least a couple of occasions and I think is constantly on the minds of its supporters and detractors. It will never end. SQGibbon (talk) 12:54, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

• FWIW, I'm not worried about them supporters (I assure you I've got this covered!), its the fake supporters (the real difference is in the mindset) who are making life difficult in the cyberspace world. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 16:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

All Growed Up as copyright violation

As Psychonaut said, stop removing the deletion template. YouTubeFan43 (talk) 19:17, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Notability

If you think an article I've created isn't notable, please take it to a deletion discussion. There is no need to clutter up these articles with nuisance tags. Thanks. As far as your merger proposal, would you merge Switcha to lemonade or limeade? What about the soda involved? I think it's best left as a stand alone. Candleabracadabra (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Nina Dobrev

You delete, before you read, again. The Talk page is mean nothing about you. Please, read, before to use totalitarian methods! Thank you in advance! - JanHusCz (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)