User talk:ScrapIronIV

DYK for Fiat 130 HP

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your diverse, interesting and consistently good contributions thus far. Often, this kind of work goes unnoticed, until now! Cheers. CassiantoTalk 18:41, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

The Pykrete article

Hi ScrapIronIV,

I wanted to share my reasoning for the edit you reverted (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pykrete&oldid=670446320&diff=prev).

a) I'm not sure if you've read the book in question, but the sentence fragment I deleted is actually quite a big spoiler that doesn't appear in the blurb or other promotional materials. As such, and especially since it's a recent book, I think there should be some overwhelming reason to mention it.

b) Since this is an article about Pykrete, it's good to share the mention of Pykrete in a book, but details of the plot don't really seem relevant.

For these reasons, I think the edit should stand. What do you think?

Apologies for the profanity in my edit message :)

Kartik Agaram (talk) 01:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I often wonder how much plot should be included. It often gets to be too much, but as this was such a concise summary, I did not see it as an extreme spoiler. Yes, I will admit the profanity made me take it a bit more seriously; it made the edit itself seem intentionally disruptive. Flies with honey, and all. As I have not read the book, I will defer to your judgement and let it stand. Perhaps, as we compromise here, you will consider that such words have power, and sometimes turn good will to ill. Cheers! Scr★pIron^IV 02:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Oi, where's that bloody Fiat article?

WP:GAN at least I reckon! Cassianto^Talk 17:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

No, I never put it up. I have not found any better references yet, and have been struggling with how to expand the lede as you recommended. I did create a new Fiat article recently, the Fiat 28-40 HP It is also a work in progress. Scr★pIron^IV 17:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Move over redirect

Hi ScrapIron, can you tell me how to do a move over redirect (as in reverting an unauthorized move, like you did recently with Upper extremity of femur)? Every time I try to do that, the redirect gets in the way and won't let me make the move/reversion. Thanks, Softlavender (talk) 22:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I did not do anything special, although I do use Twinkle which is a big help in some tasks. I select the "Move" option onder the "More" drop-down menu, and fill in the form. Perhaps Twinkle adds something to the mix; I know that it is incredibly useful to me. Scr★pIron^IV 13:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

verb tense

With regard to your reversion of my edit, I am not sure that applies in that way. We had as discussion about this very thing a while back in MoS talk, and some think that the present tense should be used in all cases, even when no examples still exist. I think we could go either way on that. I will probably try to leave it as "was" for situations like that. --rogerd (talk) 21:46, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate you discussing it, as there are often different interpretations of the MoS. As the balance of the article is also in the past tense, it looked particularly out of place. The lack of surviving examples made it even moreso. I was not aware of that discussion, but I will hop on over there and take a peek at it. Thank you for pointing it out to me! Scr★pIron^IV 21:52, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks! Kyle121101 (talk) 22:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I absolutly do think you made a mistake

Hey, did ya happen to see on that tag the thing about not removing the tag? I am assuming that it was a mistake but just cause you don't like my reasons doesn't meant you can trample all over my work. Please put the tag back. If you don't in a few minutes I'll do it myself, but I won't like you as much after that. Schwarzschild Point • 20:31, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

It is appropriate to remove a tag when it does not belong. This is discussed on the talk page; You were WP:BOLD to insert it, but it has been reeverted per WP:BRD. If you restore it, then it won't be me who has an issue. Scr★pIron^IV 20:33, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Schwarzschild Point, it maybe your idea of improving an article by bastardising it with an ugly tag, but it's not anybody else's. A dispute can easily be settled on the talk page, without making the article suffer aesthetically. Cassianto^Talk 20:37, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

There was obviously a discussion going on, wasn't there? Obviously something wrong with the page, that seven or eight people complained on the talk page. Why do you think it doesn't belong? Put it back please, I want to get along, here. Schwarzschild Point • 20:39, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

List of best-selling girl groups

Thank you for your edits on this article - I'm sure Gnata is acting in good faith when he changed the figures to only include singles from 1995 onwards, to keep it in line with other countries, but this shows precisely the problems I have with the whole article (documented on the talk page)... if you're not going to include records before 1995 then the article should be titled "List of best-selling girl groups since 1995" and not have an arbitrary cut-off date. I created the list of million sellers in the US as it's fairly easy to find this information at this sales level, and it seemed the only fair way to include all the best sellers, pre-1995 included. The trouble is, while the info is available for the US and UK, the same can't be said for other countries. No problem with using certification levels to try and compile the best sellers in Australia, but certification only started there in 1997, I think. So if there are no other sources from before this date, it will be impossible to ever compile an accurate list - and the same goes for other countries. Richard3120 (talk) 20:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC) Richard3120 (talk) 20:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I do hope the editor adds the information they wish to include, and not continue to delete sourced information out of some sense of "fairness." Scr★pIron^IV 20:13, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Let's face it, any list of best-selling girl groups in the US that fails to even mention the Supremes is on dodgy ground before it starts... Richard3120 (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for the help on the Royal Malaysian Air Force article, and keeping right, much appreciated - Cheers FOX 52 (talk) 17:01, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Thanks much - I could use it. That one keeps coming back again, and again. Scr★pIronIV 20:31, 12 August 2015 (UTC) =3 reverts Hello, from my beginning in editing today you are reverting me on the spot, okay I understand the first one neutrality, but you removed the second one completely,you could have changed it in addition to the Chartres reverts; thank you.Whiteflagfl (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Kidz Bop Looks like you and I edit-conflicted on User talk:64.134.69.166. No worries, the problem is solved:) DMacks (talk) 20:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Thanks! Just another day in paradise :-D Scr★pIronIV 20:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)