User talk:EvergreenFir: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 04:49, 23 July 2014

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Independent Information

This page is unambiguously promotional.However, every time I try and make a page that isn't promotional you delete me while I'm making the page. I'm trying to create a page about my company as a lot of my interns coming from england find it hard to understand the russian website. The page is factual not promotional. Promotional implies bias which it isn't. If you feel I written biased info tell where it is and I'll delete it. I keep having my page deleted by different "monitors" and so I'm to explain myself ever time. Could please help/ Advise me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! yours Independent informtion

Titles of Refs

Hello, EvergreenFir. You have new messages at Sunnydoo's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: Talk page FAQs

Hello, EvergreenFir. You have new messages at CAWylie's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

July 2014

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 04:45, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to European-American Unity and Rights Organization may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups|hate group]]" by the [[Southern Poverty Law Center]].<ref name="whitenation">{{cite web | url=http://www.
In an October 2007 article the author wrote (commenting on what he called Hitler's "workers paradise" "The beautiful Germany of the 1930s with

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

silly templates

don't post your silly templates on my page again. ta Mosfetfaser (talk) 05:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mosfetfaser There is nothing stopping me from posting templates on your page. If you continue to assume bad faith in me, I will continue to template you. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stay off my page - do not post there ever again - if you have a story to worry about - go to the ANI and write it there Mosfetfaser (talk) 05:56, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mosfetfaser You cannot ban someone from your talk page. They are public. I repeat, if you continue to hound me, assume bad faith, or otherwise bother me, I will template you. If it gets bad enough, I will file an ANI. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 06:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOBAN - Stay off my page - do not post there ever again - if you have a story to worry about - go to the ANI and write it there Mosfetfaser (talk) 06:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mosfetfaser - WP:OWNTALK. I can still template you if you are breaking rules. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 06:09, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "breaking rules" it is your personal opinion that I am not applying good faith to you and your personal silly twinkle template - do not post your personal opinions on my talk page ever again. Mosfetfaser (talk) 06:12, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When you assume I'm trying to game AN3, call me a liar, and hound me, you are assuming bad faith and breaking rules. There is no "opinion" there. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 06:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not hounding you , again that is your personal opinion - not a fact in any way. I have never called you a liar either. I have posted links to support all my comments.I have not "broken" a single "rule" - stay off my chat page, end of Mosfetfaser (talk) 06:16, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bye bye. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 06:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Daffodil International University

I doubt that you noticed, but this editor] has a COI for the articles he's editing. I suspect it is his job to edit those pages. Dougweller (talk) 08:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dougweller: - What am I to do when I run across editors who appear to have COIs or are making POV edits, yet they are not "clear vandalism". I tried AN3 the other day but EdJohnston said I was edit warring myself and did not reply to my question about how to deal with these editors. As you probably guessed, I primarily look for vandalism and poor edits. I am at a loss as to how to deal with people who do not follow BRD since the 3RR is in their favor (since I'm the first to revert, I'm also the first to hit 3 reverts). This has been an issue twice now (both of which EdJohnston gave me warnings for). EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:53, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tricky and I'll try to get back to you tomorrow. I've got over 125,000 edits and my only block was another Admin who clicked on the wrong link. So, try very very hard not to exceed 2RR (don't go to 3), and remember even 2RR daily can be edit warring if several editors are reverting you. I'll try to remember to look at you again tomorrow. Dougweller (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dougweller: Okay! I'll ping you in a few days if I don't hear from you! Thanks! (PS I've not been blocked, just warned). EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello EvergreenFir. If you see poor edits which are not vandalism you should take the matter to the article talk page. If the other party won't participate there but continues to revert you may eventually have a valid edit warring complaint. In a two-party dispute the steps of WP:Dispute resolution provide a way to get others involved. EdJohnston (talk) 21:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Thank you for the reply. I will need to learn the line between DRN-worthy edits and AN3/COI-type edits. In the most recent case, it seems to me the editor was COI or single-purpose. I know your examination of the edits found they had not crossed the 3RR threshold, but they were still quite suspect imho. Thank you for your reply here though! Much appreciated. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing a list

Thank you for your good work at the SPLC list. Although I differ with you on the best way to source this stuff, we agree that it needs to be sourced.

Given that WP can be edited by (almost) anyone at any time, there are various problems, I think, with:

{{Asof|2014|July}}, the following are listed as active anti-immigrant groups:<ref name="immigrant">{{cite web | url=http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/anti-immigrant/active_hate_groups | title=Active Anti-Immigrant Groups | work=[[Southern Poverty Law Center]] | accessdate=9 July 2014}}

Let's put aside trolls, fools, axe-grinders, and so on for now. Suppose somebody hears in September that the newly emerged "Sovereign Citizens of Wingnuttistan" is on SPLC's list. She looks it up on their website, and yes sure enough it's there. So she wants to add it to the WP article. The only "simple" (ha ha) solution I see is for her to take on the job of checking every other item in the sublist as well, to add this new item, and to update the above to:

{{Asof|2014|September}}, the following are listed as active anti-immigrant groups:<ref name="immigrant">{{cite web | url=http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/anti-immigrant/active_hate_groups | title=Active Anti-Immigrant Groups | work=[[Southern Poverty Law Center]] | accessdate=16 September 2014}}

Trouble is, a great percentage of well-meaning editors (let alone the others) aren't going to do this. They're more likely (A) to fictionally backdate the addition to July, (B) to lazily/myopically assume that everything that was listed in July is still listed in September, etc.

For this reason I think it's better to avoid the attempt at a source for the lot, and instead to repeat the reference. If necessary, again and again and again:

Group 1<ref name="immigrant">{{cite web | url=http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/anti-immigrant/active_hate_groups | title=Active Anti-Immigrant Groups | work=[[Southern Poverty Law Center]] | accessdate=9 July 2014}}
Group 2<ref name="immigrant" />
Group 3<ref name="immigrant" />
Group 4<ref name="immigrant" />

Etc. Ugly, but more bulletproof. -- Hoary (talk) 01:37, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, on a thread a short distance above: "Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages / If a user asks you not to edit their user pages, it is probably sensible to respect their requests (although a user cannot avoid administrator attention or appropriate project notices and communications by merely demanding their talk page is not posted to)" (here). If another editor is seriously misbehaving, it doesn't have to be you that informs the editor. Instead, bring up the matter at WP:AN/I. If what you write there is convincing, then an administrator will deal with the matter. -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Hoary! I admit I did the former citation method out of a bit of laziness. It won't be too much trouble to convert to the latter with some copy-paste though. However, I did like the idea of using "as of" because the lists clearly change, but you're correct that most people wouldn't update. Hm... think there's a way to include a date? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:50, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a simple way. I think you're stuck with

Group 1<ref name="immigrant201407">{{cite web | url=http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/anti-immigrant/active_hate_groups | title=Active Anti-Immigrant Groups | work=[[Southern Poverty Law Center]] | accessdate=9 July 2014}}
Group 2<ref name="immigrant201407" />

or similar. (Even if there were some wonderful template that would solve your problems, chances are that other, well-meaning contributors wouldn't bother to read the instructions for using it.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll keep that in mind about the ANI. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:50, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stay cool, sound cool. If you attract some fruity insults about your editing or person, perhaps regard them as unintended trophies. (They should say more about the writers than about you.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christ The King Church. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For the hard work you put in verifying the story List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups . ta Mosfetfaser (talk) 04:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mosfetfaser! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 16:16, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLPCAT

Categories regarding religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources.

I noticed you violated our policy on biographies of living people by adding Anthony Rapp to a category he does not publicly self-identify as. Please consider reverting your change. JackSchmidt (talk) 04:59, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@JackSchmidt: I reviewed the edit by a user who replaced a sourced statement with an unsourced one. I'll review the edit and see if the cat needs changed. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:00, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You were correct. Thanks for pointing that out. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! JackSchmidt (talk) 05:06, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NBA players

Yes, absolutely. Only once the team itself has officially announced it on their website can we update it i.e. an NBA.com source. For example, Paul Pierce just agreed to signed with the Wizards. That is not official as the Wizards themselves have not announced it. When it is listed here, it is official. Only a few people of Wikipedia keep patrol on NBA articles and revert when unofficial signings are added. It be great for more people to help us out. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 06:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@DaHuzyBru: - I'll keep an eye out! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Demetrios Panagiotacopulos

I was gong for AfD, but now you've added PROD tag so let's watch. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OccultZone - Lol I debated that too... seems like a resume-type page so thought I'd try CSD first. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antifeminism

I bet the article's been linked on some extremist site. Keep an eye on it - it keeps getting hit by new IPs. Personally, I think it should be permanently semiprotected, as a huge amount of the article's edit history is reverting changes to the cited definition. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Roscelese: It's on my watchlist. I'll keep an eye on it and if it intensifies, I'll submit a PPR. Right now I expect they'd say the vandalism is too slow/infrequent to warrant page protection. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Futurama, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lrrr. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Um

About this: reversion: Self-presentation is a behavior. I don't really care what it says, so long as we can get rid of the awkward "what one does oneself" circumlocution. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bob's Burgers

FYI [1]-- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UAA Request

I blocked the account, and revision deleted the log entries at Laverne Cox per your request, but will be leaving the log history at UAA alone for transparency. Just wanted to give you the followup regarding the revdel request. Monty ₈₄₅ 23:34, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Monty845 - Thank you! I appreciate it! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 23:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hema Malini

Sir, I have posted my comments and justified the reason as to why the religious identity should be changed. Please, see it on the talk page of the article. Thank you.Iamgame (talk) 17:11, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Iceland

Why that edit is unnecessary? 173.206.37.64 (talk) 22:36, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was overly specific for the lead sentence in my opinion. Country means roughly the same thing but is understandable to more readers. For reference, talking about this edit. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What the Heck

My information was true considering the fact that a news report confirmed it, so they had no business deleting it, because either way it was true,they probably didn't even try searching it up! Here's the report: http://www.newsnet5.com/entertainment/celebrity/nicki-minaj-gets-animated-for-steven-universe_09416171

If they were following the rules then they could have easily done some research to see if it was true or not. I did.So I hope they got a notification too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emarldquatz (talk • contribs)

The talk page didn't have any one talking about confirmation on dates that's why I didn't bother! and I did give a source that apparently wasn't "reliable" but yet a News website confirmed it, making what I wrote true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emarldquatz (talk • contribs)

Thank you

Thank you! that's all I wanted! fans have been waiting for this information for 3 months.

@@ Line 162: / Line 162: @@
 :The talk page didn't have any one talking about confirmation on dates that's why I didn't bother! and I did give a source that apparently wasn't "reliable" but yet a News website confirmed it, making what I wrote true. {{unsigned|Emarldquatz}}
+== Thank you ==
+Thank you! that's all I wanted! fans have been waiting for this information for 3 months.