Jump to content

User talk:General Ization: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎LNER A1/A3: new section
→‎Chicago edits: new section
Line 221: Line 221:


Have you read the sources used in that sentence? I have. That's why I made the change I did - to match the sources that are already there! This wasn't an unsourced addition, just a correction of a misinterpretation of the existing source. (And, incidentally, the statement that 1933 is nine years after 1924 hardly needs a citation.) [[Special:Contributions/81.100.245.192|81.100.245.192]] ([[User talk:81.100.245.192|talk]]) 12:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Have you read the sources used in that sentence? I have. That's why I made the change I did - to match the sources that are already there! This wasn't an unsourced addition, just a correction of a misinterpretation of the existing source. (And, incidentally, the statement that 1933 is nine years after 1924 hardly needs a citation.) [[Special:Contributions/81.100.245.192|81.100.245.192]] ([[User talk:81.100.245.192|talk]]) 12:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

== Chicago edits ==

Please stop undoing my changes to the Chicago article. I do not have to provide a reliable source when merely stating that a handful of skyscrapers were constructed in the 1920s, when i linked to each skyscraper's individual Wikipedia page where the year of construction is clearly stated. It's practically common knowledge.

Revision as of 13:12, 29 August 2018


PLEASE READ

Stop icon
If I have nominated your article for deletion, removed your content or reverted your change and you would like to know why,
please review the following Wikipedia policies and guidelines, among others that may be mentioned in a message I left on your Talk page:

Hi, You must live outside the United States, since in American English, commas always go inside quotation marks. Given that the reference to "Drinking the Kool-Aid" is about American culture, I stand by my revision.Jmn100

For reference, I have included an excerpt from the web grammar site, 'Quick and Dirty Tips':

Quotation Marks with Commas and Periods The most common question people ask about quotation marks is whether periods and commas go inside or outside, and the answer depends on where your audience lives because in American English we always put periods and commas inside quotation marks, but in British English periods and commas can go inside or outside (kind of like the American rules for question marks and exclamation points). I use this memory trick: Inside the US, inside the quotation marks. Here are some examples:

“Don’t underestimate me,” she said with a disarmingly friendly smile.

I can never remember how to spell “bureaucracy.”

Don’t get confused when you see this handled differently in The Economist or on the BBC website; just remember that it’s different in those publications because the British do it differently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmn100 (talkcontribs) 19:12, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmn100: Please don't assume that other editors are not familiar with the conventions of one or another version of English. For reference, I refer you to MOS:LQ, which describes our policy concerning the treatment of punctuation and quotes here at Wikipedia: "On the English Wikipedia, use the 'logical quotation' style in all articles, regardless of the variety of English in which they are written. Include terminal punctuation within the quotation marks only if it was present in the original material, and otherwise place it after the closing quotation mark. For the most part, this means treating periods and commas in the same way as question marks: Keep them inside the quotation marks if they apply only to the quoted material and outside if they apply to the whole sentence. ... If the quotation is a single word or a sentence fragment, place the terminal punctuation outside the closing quotation mark." Examples are given at the link. In the subject sentence, "Kool Aid" is not a complete sentence; hence the comma goes outside the quote marks. General Ization Talk 19:18, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmn100: Also, please remember to always sign your comments on any Talk page by typing four tildes (~~~~) after them. General Ization Talk


OK, I was heretofore unaware that Wikipedia had its own style guideline for punctuation - thanks for the explanation.Jmn100 (talk) 06:38, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi General Ization, it's clear that the IP editor that we have been dealing with is persistent in pursuing an agenda of supplying perceived synonyms to articles. I have undone some of the individual's other contributions. I left Air force#Organization and units in place, which the individual had changed from "Organization" to "Organization and units" only because there is a table showing "units". If this persists, what's our next step? Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 21:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HopsonRoad: At this point, a report at WP:EW3 is probably in order concerning Ship (I've already issued the warning template). I hesitated to file the report only because technically I could be considered at 4RR there myself (though perhaps debatable). But I agree that, aside from their edit warring, their edits are of dubious value. General Ization Talk 21:27, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the ticklish situation that you describe and stand ready to dilute the issue between the two of us. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

added Sro23
readded KaisaLYmblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
  • Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news


August 2018

Hi General Ization: Please note that the changes done by me today on all the international players do not need any special sourcing. This information is automatically updated on player's ESPN Cricinfo page, whose URL is mentioned as information source in the infobox. Please guide in case my point is not acceptable to you.

Thanks, Vikram Maingi (talk) 02:07, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledged. I have removed the warnings from your Talk page and restored your edits. General Ization Talk 02:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiffen

I came across this as a random article. I see you kept my elimination of the ungrammatical and random text. I don't have a vested interest, but I'm not sure this is a Viking name. I couldn't find reliable sources, but goog did turn up these links:

Peter Flass (talk) 13:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Sasha controversy

He is British, undisputed. Lazz R is the one who is being disruptive, he has cited no sources that would consider him to be Welsh and has ignored the reason as to why his page was moved from 'Sasha (Welsh DJ)' to 'Sasha DJ', read all of the 'request page move' section on his talk page and see for yourself. Also are you giving him a warning to ban him too as he is the one being disruptive? I hope this isn't bias. Sellsomepapers (talk) 15:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sellsomepapers: You have been advised multiple times now, by multiple editors, to open a discussion on the Talk page if you think this should be changed. You have failed to do so. I am not going to discuss it with you here. If you change it again, you will be blocked for disruptive editing. General Ization Talk 15:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sellsomepapers: As for your claim that no sources describe the subject as Welsh, I had no trouble at all finding one in a single, simple search. You can either improve the article or damage it. I suggest you do the former as the latter will result in your being blocked. General Ization Talk 15:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors August 2018 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the August 2018 GOCE newsletter. Thanks to everyone who participated in the Guild's June election; your new and returning coordinators are listed below. The next election will occur in December 2018; all Wikipedia editors in good standing may take part.

Our June blitz focused on Requests and articles tagged for copy edit in October 2017. Of the eleven people who signed up, eight editors recorded a total of 28 copy edits, including 3 articles of more than 10,000 words. Complete results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the seventeen people who signed up, thirteen editors completed 194 copy edits, successfully removing all articles tagged in the last three months of 2017. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are here.

The August blitz will run for one week, from 19 to 25 August. Sign up now!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for reversion

--TolhurstJohn (talk) 01:01, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Hello there, I've made what I believe is a genuine and useful contribution to the house page.[reply]

The house is composed of many systems that deliver to the needs of the occupants. It is true that the solution reflects the culture and resources of the inhabitants.

If you have reverted, you are saying my contribution is untrue or already said. I would like you to demonstrate why, or reverse the reversion.

Thanks very much, TolhurstJohn (talk) 01:01, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted because I felt your addition added nothing of significant value to an encyclopedic article on the topic of "House". Not everything that is true or currently unsaid about houses needs to be added to the article. General Ization Talk 01:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this suggestion is of value. Indigenous people have a right to practice culture. When seeking to improve Environmental Health, governments often fall into the trap of offering the kind of accommodation that they know supports white people in cities. I am trying to establish the principle that the house is a model of culture and that to work, each kind of house requires that particular cultural practices are followed. Therefore donating a house to people who practice a different culture is in danger of not working and in fact this is what we see on the ground. What we see is houses that quickly go into disrepair. The offered solution is well intended but misdirected.

A house is a cultural construct that enables the practice of the culture of the poeple who developed it. This is an extremely important thing to understand about houses and explains a lot of why houses vary from place to place. And why houses that work for some people do not work for others.

As part of my contribution to lifting indigenous health outcomes in Northern Australia I am arguing that we deconstruct the house into the individual systems that deliver the required benefits, so that Environmental health can be improved on a community basis rather than a nuclear family basis.

Understanding that each house is an artifact of the culture that developed it is an important principle that I need to establish. We tend to forget that. The house can also shape culture, so what is provided determines what cultural practices can be sustained. For example, if you are an Australian Aboriginal made to live in a suburban 3 bedroom house in a remote location, you will lose connection to your wider family and to country and as a consequence your health will suffer. This is known now to the case, based on the evidence that has been collected under the Australia Federal Government's Closing the Gap effort.

At present, the wikipedia entry fails to recognise this fundamental point, and is the poorer for it.

Please accept my addition, in support of greater clarity of the deep bond between culture and house form and in support of better housing and environmental health outcomes.

John Tolhurst, Perth Australia TolhurstJohn (talk) 10:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@TolhurstJohn: "As part of my contribution to lifting indigenous health outcomes in Northern Australia I am arguing ... an important principle that I need to establish." No, you don't need to establish it here unless you can provide citations of one or more published, reliable sources that establish it. See Original research. The publication of novel theories and personal opinions of Wikipedia editors is prohibited here in the encyclopedia. If you are here solely for the purpose of improving the encyclopedia, you will need to follow Wikipedia policies. If you are here for some other purpose, kindly stop editing before you are blocked. General Ization Talk 14:59, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amos_Rapoport wrote the Book "House form and Culture" published in 1969 which AFAIK is the best source. The concept was taught to me by Phillip Gibbs, who was a collegue of Prof Gordon Stevenson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Stephenson) who did the master plan for London following WWII. So, not my theory, I'm just the guy wanting important stuff recognised. Thanks for knocking me into shape. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TolhurstJohn (talkcontribs) 21:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2Chainz Edits

Hi. I get why you reverted the punctuation edits, but why did you revert the colon back to a clearly incorrectly used semicolon? "I have a surprise for you; it's cake" is correct; "I have a surprise for you; cake" is not. But "I have a surprise for you: cake," is also correct.

Also why the rv on the Wikipedia wikilink --FeldBum (talk) 17:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to repeat the edits that don't run counter to our MOS. What I mainly saw were the issues with MOS:LQ. General Ization Talk 17:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, will do. --FeldBum (talk) 17:40, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Dean Meyers

Or, when reverting someone's edit, you could leave an edit summary explaining why you're reverting it. But here I am. Why did you revert that link? Czolgolz (talk) 12:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Czolgolz: Or you could read the edit summary I left. General Ization Talk 12:48, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) (talk page watcher) According to WP:EL, Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia (external links), but they should not normally be placed in the body of an article. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 12:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. There was no edit summary originally, that's why I was confused. Czolgolz (talk) 13:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Livermore, California

OK, I'll redo the edits as citations or references instead of links as requested. It is just that the top employers table are significantly out-of-date and there are significant other Livermore sites that should be referenced. Gregt590 (talk) 01:47, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Hello, I’m sorry for continuously adding to the page. I didn’t see your warnings but I removed the most recent addition of mine. I have a question though; why was the source I used considered unreliable? Starklinson (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for reverting and protecting enwiki from Vandalism PATH SLOPU (Talk) 07:50, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LNER A1/A3

Have you read the sources used in that sentence? I have. That's why I made the change I did - to match the sources that are already there! This wasn't an unsourced addition, just a correction of a misinterpretation of the existing source. (And, incidentally, the statement that 1933 is nine years after 1924 hardly needs a citation.) 81.100.245.192 (talk) 12:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago edits

Please stop undoing my changes to the Chicago article. I do not have to provide a reliable source when merely stating that a handful of skyscrapers were constructed in the 1920s, when i linked to each skyscraper's individual Wikipedia page where the year of construction is clearly stated. It's practically common knowledge.