User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom: Difference between revisions
Mr. Random (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 107: | Line 107: | ||
[[User:Peter Isotalo|Peter]] <sup>[[User talk:Peter Isotalo|Isotalo]]</sup> 17:00, 15 February 2015 (UTC) |
[[User:Peter Isotalo|Peter]] <sup>[[User talk:Peter Isotalo|Isotalo]]</sup> 17:00, 15 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
*Seconded - I also agree with most of what (I think) you're trying to say, but edits like that one and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gamergate_controversy&diff=647357703&oldid=647352248 this one] are exactly the sort of acidity ArbCom warned you against, IIRC. [[User:Mr. Random|Random]] <sup>[[User talk:Mr. Random|(?)]]</sup> 23:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:05, 16 February 2015
This is TheRedPenOfDoom's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Auto-archiving period: 10 days ![]() |
Index
|
||||||||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
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
Joust
Why did you remove my added content from the Joust video game article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Widowman88s (talk • contribs)
Please note that the Presidency University, Kolkata page has been vandalised
Please correct / delete unreferenced comments such as 'Hence all corruptions are tucked away under the cupboard.[3]' The citations are to blogs hosted by specific individuals / interest groups.
Thanks
Many thanks for cleaning up the errors on the Presidency page. A few still remain but I'm not yet confident enough to make the changes on my own.
AfD notification
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wilayat_Kirkuk_(ISIL)
Happy New Year!
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Fuochi_d%27artificio.gif/150px-Fuochi_d%27artificio.gif)
Dear TheRedPenOfDoom,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)
This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").
Dual Survival (season 4)
I noticed you my reverted edit again on that article. I thought I would show you the WP:PROVEIT. I don't care if we wait until the date of the show actually airing to link on the next season page. But I thought I would let you know the first episode of season five is titled "Into The Canyons" and is scheduled to air on January 21, 2015. [1]
Ileana D'Cruz
Let me edit Ileana D'Cruz
John A. Shaw
Hi there, Red Pen. I noticed that around a year ago you made some edits to John A. "Jack" Shaw to remove some content that violated BLP (link); I believe this article's content still has significant issues, particularly in terms of UNDUE and NPOV. Earlier this month, I posted a request on the Talk page to point out a couple of simple points to start, but I haven't received any response. Important to note, I'm working as a consultant to Jack Shaw, so won't be making direct edits myself due to my financial conflict of interest. Would you be willing to take a look at this for me? Also, hope you're doing well post-ArbCom. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 11:52, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for going about it the right way. Red Pen seems uncharacteristically inactive at the moment, so I took the liberty of handling this. Rhoark (talk) 17:38, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you, Rhoark! It's really appreciated. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 23:34, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Arbitration request "America: Imagine the World Without Her"
Hi TheRedPenOfDoom, this is just a courtesy note to let you know that the above case, on which you were listed as a party, has been declined. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Lankiveil (speak to me) 06:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC).
MasterChef India (season 4)
Hi RedPen, Why did you delete the page for MasterChef India (season 4)? This would have provided details related specific to this season. Deepak Nayak (talk) 05:36, 10 February 2015 (UTC)dnayakan
Madni Channel
what's your problem, Madni Channel is a tv channel, thousands of articals on tv channel, but your jealousy only Madani Channel... plz --Obaid Raza (talk) 07:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
February 2015
Hello, I'm Lightspeed2012. An edit that you recently made to Wikipedia:Sandbox seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I was conducting a test... Lightspeed2012 18:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Uh... the sandbox is actually for testing. MadGuy7023 (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- Someone who was over at the sandbox Think this was conflicting reverts that might have ended up at the wrong talkpage after someone broke the sandbox. Amortias (T)(C) 18:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Amortias:@MadGuy7023: I used the wrong warning. I was only testing the capabilities of this specific computer. Lightspeed2012 18:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- Someone who was over at the sandbox Think this was conflicting reverts that might have ended up at the wrong talkpage after someone broke the sandbox. Amortias (T)(C) 18:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Pastor
Please specify exactly what is wrong with the article and what needs to be corrected. I'm new to this, so I'm trying to cut to the chase, make the changes, get rid of the "idiot" messages at the top of the article and be done with it. Thank you for your kind assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D Pastor2014 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
You said it twice on my talk page
You said twice on my talk page something about the Foundation pressuring ArbCom into making a press release. That is absolutely false. I have no idea where you heard such a thing, nor do I know how far and wide you have spread this rumor, but it is absolutely false.
The ArbCom began discussing making a statement in response to the false press coverage in The Guardian all on their own. I looped in Katherine as an advisor to help with the crafting. There was no pressure of any kind from the Foundation, and indeed, the Foundation has basically no tools at their disposal with which to pressure ArbCom anyway. You do the Arbcom, the Foundation, and a project a real disservice by spreading such disinformation.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 06:55, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Jimbo Wales: I cannot find it now in the sea of comments and pages where the "press release" has been discussed and blanked, but the question was asked "Whose idea was this?" and an ArbCom member stated "The Foundation". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Here is the comment [[2] " In fact the impetus for the ArbCom (not Wikipedia, ArbCom) statement came from the WMF. Roger Davies]] [[User talk:Roger Davies 22:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)" ]
- -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:57, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm, someone's being a bit less-than-truthful here... Tarc (talk) 13:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
You said here that the claim is vague. Is it not backed up by sections 6 and 7? ~ P-123 (talk) 08:47, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Another editor Mbcap has raised more or less the same point as you did, on the Talk page. ~ P-123 (talk) 12:10, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just love your username! ~ P-123 (talk) 11:23, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Mohanlal
Any idea what all can be included in the "title" parameter in Infobox person. I think in this article only Lieutenant colonel can be a title. Malayala Sahityam (talk) 16:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
GG debate
There's more than enough constructive posts arguing against attempts to skew Gamergate controversy to a pro-GG POV. I don't agree with any of the suggestions that harassment claims should be "proved" or that the article should be renamed, but they don't require hyperboles like this to refute. Please consider letting arguments speak for themselves and don't allow yourself to be provoked.
Peter Isotalo 17:00, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
- Seconded - I also agree with most of what (I think) you're trying to say, but edits like that one and this one are exactly the sort of acidity ArbCom warned you against, IIRC. Random (?) 23:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)