Jump to content

User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Ngebendi (talk | contribs)
Line 243: Line 243:
With fifteen other books in the Dresden files each warranting an article on wikipedia, Grave Peril '''is''' notable. [[User:Ngebendi|Ngebendi]] ([[User talk:Ngebendi|talk]]) 18:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
With fifteen other books in the Dresden files each warranting an article on wikipedia, Grave Peril '''is''' notable. [[User:Ngebendi|Ngebendi]] ([[User talk:Ngebendi|talk]]) 18:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Ngebendi}} An editor making the claim that an subject is [[WP:N|notable]] must actually , you know, [[WP:42|provide sources that indicate that the subject has been noted]]. And [[WP:OTHERCRAP|pointing at other articles that ALSO fail to meet the requirements is not evidence]]. -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|<span style="color:red;;;">TRPoD <small>aka The Red Pen of Doom</small></span>]] 18:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Ngebendi}} An editor making the claim that an subject is [[WP:N|notable]] must actually , you know, [[WP:42|provide sources that indicate that the subject has been noted]]. And [[WP:OTHERCRAP|pointing at other articles that ALSO fail to meet the requirements is not evidence]]. -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|<span style="color:red;;;">TRPoD <small>aka The Red Pen of Doom</small></span>]] 18:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
:Notability issue has been dealt with some time ago for ''Cold Days'', if I remember correctly.

Revision as of 18:41, 17 November 2014


And there is also This archive.

Barnstar

Thx 4 d barnstar :D. WIll do my best to make articles nicer to see and read. Ssven2 (talk)


Dude now check the main lead. Every thing mentioned is sourced and all sources are reliable. please check before reverting. myself cleaned unwanted content.now the article looks perfect. Thanks Harirajmohanhrm talk (talk)‎ 14:40, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Edit warring noticeboard notice

November 2014

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Everest (Indian TV series). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Tamravidhir (talk!) 11:40, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bharat Ka Veer Putra – Maharana Pratap 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:
  • {{unsourced}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:56, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of mathematical identities 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:
  • * [[Hypergeometric function identities]]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:18, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Asian American#Radical infobox changes

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Radical infobox changes. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

The editor that I had requested assistance with, has again made changes to the article Asian American without achieving consensus or responding on the talk page. Assistance is requested in returning the article to its previous state before the article was disrupted, and assistance is requested in talking to the editor.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, I might have created an edit conflict on the article page, please remove my edit.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:23, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please join us at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Asian American.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is 115ash at Asian American. Thank you. —RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious

Why do others repeatedly delete your User page? Cheers. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 13:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My response is on your user page : User_talk:71.239.87.100#Deleting_my_user_page.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:08, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dr. Fox effect, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monotone. 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) 17:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How to proceed with the GA?

Thank you for participating in GA of article Fursuit. But what should be made to continue the discussion? Apparently, there are not many people interested in this issue. Keplerbr (talk) 18:11, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 8 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vaishnavi Dhanraj

I request you to help me out in editing Vaishnavi Dhanraj page. It contains lot of unreliable sources and big part of content which is not confirm by any of reliable sources. Aryan.for.you (talk) 06:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Check this also Ankita Bhargava Aryan.for.you (talk) 07:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bobfoot

Thanks for your edit. Have you considered updating the Patterson–Gimlin film article? And perhaps cutting it back to a stub? I reckon it doesn't deserve all that "allegations" and "analysis" stuff now (if it ever did). Anyway, nice find! The instructions for hiding the zipper at the back made me laugh. :-) Bishonen | talk 16:28, 9 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]

that is a bigger project than I want to take on! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removal from black list file

Hi,

this is regarding portal: powerstuffs dot com . Just seeing it in wiki's black list and shocked. whatever link i've pasted i believed am contributing to wiki by giving some additional information by giving external link. however understood with constant removal it should't be this way and instantly stopped placing the link. request you to kindly remove my link from your spammer list. My portal is actually on phase where it growing. I am constantly upgrading the data quality. I serve lyrics for personal use and learning. give my review about the movie and whatever information we share is correct according to reliable resource.

please consider removing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.202.85.94 (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom notification

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#GamerGate and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks,--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 00:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What section(s) need secondary or tertiary references? Ollieinc (talk) 03:20, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ollieinc: the question is " which sections are NOT entirely or mostly sourced to the school, or other primary documents? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken. It is difficult with school pages to include many secondary or tertiary sources. Ollieinc (talk) 03:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Ollieinc: If you are trying to recreate the school's brochureware, it is probably and rightfully difficult. But since that is not what we are here to do, it doesn't matter. Find what the third parties have talked about and build the article from them. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gamergate talk page

Your comments are uncivil. Discussion would be more productive if you were polite. Cobbsaladin (talk) 04:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Please kind sirs, present reliably published sources to support your positions at your earliest convenience." - @Cobbsaladin: I just may try that. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

William Lane Craig Article, critical sources

I just want to inform you that I will write some critical stuff in the article useing these sources:

  • Why I Am Not a Christian (2000), Keith M. Parsons, Atlanta Freethought Society in 2000. [1]
  • Two Ways to Prove Atheism (1996), Quentin Smith, Atheist Alliance convention in Minneapolis, MN on April 6, 1996[2]
  • Review of Reasonable Faith (2007), Chris Hallquist, Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books. 350 pp[3]
  • Reply To Professor Craig (1995), Graham Oppy, Sophia 34, 2, December 1995, pp.15-29[4]
  • Quantum Cosmology's Implication of Atheism (1997), Quentin Smith, Analysis 57.4, October 1997, pp. 295-304[5]
  • The Kalam Cosmological Argument: The Question of the Metaphysical Possibility of an Infinite Set of Real Entities (2002)

(Revised 2014), Arnold T. Guminski, Philo (Vol. 5, pp. 196-215)[6]

  • Inverse Operations With Transfinite Numbers And The Kalam Cosmological Argument (1995), Graham Oppy, International Philosophical Quarterly, 35, 2, pp.219-221[7]
  • Historical Evidence and the Empty Tomb Story, A Reply to William Lane Craig, Jeffery Jay Lowder, Journal of Higher Criticism 8:2 (Fall 2001), pp. 251-93[8]
  • God (1997), Jan Narveson, Reason Papers, #22 - Fall 97, pp. 109-118[9]
  • The Anthropic Coincidences, Evil and the Disconfirmation of Theism (1992), Quentin Smith, RELIGIOUS STUDIES in 1992 (Volume 28, pp. 347-350)[10]

These are all critical papers--Lexikon-Duff (talk) 12:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA and that's all you have to say? Interesting. Strange, I never read that any one of you guys wanted to help me and work with me in a collegial manner, no one ever said something about all the source I provided, I think that really shows how much you want to work with me to write some legitimate critisism. But I already think that by looking at all the warnings you get that this will not be a fruitful discussion.--Lexikon-Duff (talk) 13:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continual redirection of Assail page

You have continually redirected the Assail page to the relevant series page. I have added several citations and attempted to begin a discussion in Talk:Assail (novel) rather than continue this mindless revert war. One citation I added was from Clarkesworld Magazine which you seem to think is affiliated in some way to the work, but this is blatantly false. The other two citations are to blogs but not personal blogs as advised against in Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources. Neither are affiliated with the work and they are primarily supplemental to provide information on the number of novels in this series, the sequence, etc. I would appreciate it if you could either revert your redirect, or respond to my post on the article's talk page to discuss your reasoning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knmorgan08 (talkcontribs) 19:04, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thanks so much for keeping the "Gamergate controversy" article in line with reality. You're doing great work! Charginghawk (talk) 02:43, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:TheRedPenOfDoom reported by User:UniGuard (Result: ). Thank you. UniGuard (talk) 10:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit waring

I think you may consider inserting a maintenance tag instead of removing large amount of contents. Or you may investigate for reliable sources and replace it, removing contents is more like an easy job. I am not interested to involve in an edit war. thanks UniGuard (talk) 11:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OPERATION COLLUSION

Lies, Bias, Corruption, Tyranny
and Disruption

https://8chan.co/gg/res/485407.html

WP ARBCOM GENERAL Unbearable Faggot 11/11/14 (Tue) 00:01:55 68f7b4 No.485407[Last 50 Posts][Watch Thread]

GET IN HERE WE HAVE GATHERED ENOUGH SOURCES

NOW WE HAVE TO FIND ANY AND ALL CASES OF COLLUSION BETWEEN THE 5 HORSEMEN OF WIKIBIAS AND ADMINS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/NorthBySouthBaranof

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ryulong

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tarc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/TheRedPenOfDoom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/TaraInDC

Unbearable Faggot 11/11/14 (Tue) 14:26:41 d4ab81 No.490187

>>487009

>The Horseman of Lies

>The Horseman of Bias

>The Horseman of Corruption

>The Horseman of Disruption

>The Horseman of Tyranny

https://8chan.co/gg/res/500385.html#500385

@NorthBySouthBaranof:, @Ryulong:, @Tarc: , @TaraInDC:

I AM CLAIMING Horseman of Disruption, WHICH ARE YOU? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:57, 13 November 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Can I be the Horseman of Sanity? These 8channers are beyond all degrees of absurdity previously imagined. Tarc (talk) 13:11, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm perversely hurt that I haven't been sane and active enough on this topic to draw the ire of these idiots. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You really don't want to, trust me. I rarely use Twitter, logged in today to see hundreds upon hundreds of @pinged remarks. My god, these are ugly, ugly souls...and the saddest part is, it was about 1/1000th of what Quinn's been subjected to over the last few months. Tarc (talk) 00:50, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You must be imagining things, because, you know, ETHICS. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, Horseman of Civility here--TRPoD, you really need to tone it down. All-capsing "END OF STORY" is totally sophomoric, of course, but in general, whenever you feel the need to shout down the opposition, turn to Twitter and stay away from Wikipedia. I already commented on a note you left there, and then I saw a later one, "Your "personal annoyance" is COMPLETELY irrelevant"--come on man. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 03:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot be serious that the gamergate talk page is the appropriate place to vent personal annoyances? if it is, then it is perfectly appropriate for me to vent mine IN ALL CAPS. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now you're sounding like a car commercial with John McEnroe in it. Yes, I can be quite serious here. Your own frustration was clear enough as well. If that person's frustration is so inappropriate (mind you, I'm not defending their comment), why would you feed into it? Tarc makes a valid point below (though I won't click on the link; it's probably a video of Tarc playing Call of Duty). Especially if you're convinced you're right your behavior should be well above what's expected, and behavior is frequently a matter considered by Arbcom. As a matter of fact, I'm an admin and since general sanctions apply, I think you should indeed take me seriously, even more so since I have no desire to block anyone there. Chillax, as young people say. Drmies (talk) 04:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is though, that's the sorta thing that gets tallied up for when/if this whole mess ever goes to Arbcom. I know it's hard, but remember what Jesus said; turn the other cheek. Tarc (talk) 03:37, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I thought he said "but ethics"-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:51, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, unlike the typical 18-35 gamer, I'm not a man-child who overcompensates for their shortcomings in life by alpha-maling in a digital warzone. I wouldn't be caught dead on a Call of Duty game. Instead, I swing magical swords at gargantuan enemies while tilling farms and catching pets. World of Warcraft, always and forever. Btw, the link is just to Robot Chicken, rthe best show in the universe. Tarc (talk) 04:37, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint about your edits at WP:AN3

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:TheRedPenOfDoom reported by User:UniGuard (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 05:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Mohanlal

You are removing contents from other awards and recognition section which are non reliable sources for "you". Removing the unsourced are reasonable. There will not be citations from TOI, The hindu, indianexpress or any other news daily's expecially for awards given from any trusts like "mg soman award", film chamber awards or from any council or associations, they only report awards with high importance and news value. So it will be difficult to find a highly reputed citations for "other" awards and recognitions. Don't remove contents saying non reliable unless it's evidently a highly non reliable source. If you still consider a cite unreliable you may ask wikipedia administrators for help verifying the reliability of the source respective to the claim before removing it.ThanksUniGuard (talk) 12:26, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the award is important they only report award with high news values. UniGuard (talk) 12:38, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not what you care. This is an encyclopedia and you are one among the "self" proclaimed wikipedia senator, which you not really are. You are just a guy who is trying to implement your own rules behind the shades of wikipedia rules and policies. And you just said Kerala Handloom goodwill ambassador is a simple reward. So you no nothing about Kerala and it's heritage. It's a reputed "honour". And you no more had the eligibility to edit that article. UniGuard (talk) 12:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Removing all unsourced ? then what about these articles, let see what will you do about this if you are not targeting a single page at a corner of little known kerala. List of awards and nominations received by Johnny Depp, List of awards and nominations received by Christian Bale. Best wishes UniGuard (talk) 13:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not a convincing reason for cowardness. Your edits will not survive in those article and you know it. UniGuard (talk) 13:32, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rajput

Limited web access at the moment but re [1], many of those sources are not really reliable. And some of the phrasing is horrific. - Sitush (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a discussion on the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 01:00, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in these SPIs

Given the problems you've recently had with UniGuard, et al., you may be interested in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-senetor and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Harirajmohanhrm. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

100k

Good going! – S. Rich (talk) 04:25, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

i get a book! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:34, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This editor is an Illustrious Looshpah and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge.

Erdogan and Cuba

I know that Erdogan is not a historian, scholar or anything, but I added that paragraph as the source stated scholarly consensus against that hypothesis. That such consensus has had to be taken would suggest that he was not the first person to ever make that hypothesis. '''tAD''' (talk) 22:44, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@The Almightey Drill: If there is evidence that we can frame in the article that it was a notable fringe position/held by people that might make an influence, then sure. But we dont need to quote every self-promoter who says something quite obviously looney and discredited. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; you might want to reconsider adding the album and single to that AfD - it's pretty bad form to add them in the middle of the debate (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_nominate_multiple_related_pages_for_deletion). They're better off as separate discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 02:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There has been one comment total. If there is not sufficient evidence for the artist then there sure as hell is not going to be for the single or the album. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In which case case they can be speedied under A9. I'm not saying they'll survive, I'm saying it's bad form to bundle things in the middle of a discussion. If people have the AfD on their watchlist they're unlikely to notice the recordings got added, since your edit summary wasn't exactly precise either. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 02:38, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
i dont see how ninja speedy-ing hours after an AfD would be "more fair" or "better form" than giving several days notice to improve along with the main article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:49, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why "more fair" is in quotes there but hey. I'll comment on the AfD to draw attention to the fact you've added them into the discussion (since you didn't). It's best to keep things as clear as possible, don't you think? Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 02:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Grave Peril

With fifteen other books in the Dresden files each warranting an article on wikipedia, Grave Peril is notable. Ngebendi (talk) 18:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ngebendi: An editor making the claim that an subject is notable must actually , you know, provide sources that indicate that the subject has been noted. And pointing at other articles that ALSO fail to meet the requirements is not evidence. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Notability issue has been dealt with some time ago for Cold Days, if I remember correctly.