User talk:Hersfold

	Welcome to my Talk Page!
	Thank you for coming by, however please note that I have largely retired from Wikipedia. Messages left here will not receive a prompt response, if ever. Please also note that I no longer hold any access rights; if you are contacting me in relation to a block, deletion, or any other administrative action I have taken, I am unable to assist you. Please contact another administrator for help. If you do have an urgent need to contact me specifically, such as for one of my bots, please send me an email via Special:Emailuser/Hersfold.
		User:Hersfold/Talk Header - v • e

Your UAA template

Just dropped in to congratulate you on the excellent template. I actually decided to help out on WP:UAA just so I could use it! (If you still want to smack me, you can have my address). George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Just keep in mind admins reserve final decision on these, so if you're ever not sure, it may be best to just ignore them until an admin comes by. (And I've reconsidered the smack, your referral was well-intentioned. ;-) ) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind but I've added a couple of extra parameters. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 07:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Template help

I appreciate your attempted help on {{GFDL-Armenica}}...however, it doesn't seem to have worked. I tried subst'ing the template on Image:Saghmoa.jpg and the error message was still included, along with some stray characters ("{{subst:empty template|"). Kelly ^hi! 23:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry, I missed a couple brackets. It should be working now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		Thanks so much for fixing the problems with {{GFDL-Armenica}}! You are truly a template master! Kelly hi! 23:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! Thanks for the star! :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

the edit conflcit that wasn't

Hi,

Just checking to make sure this was an edit conflict of some kind, and not that I did anything incorrectly. That was would have been my first unblock request, if I did it wrong let me know. --barneca (talk) 01:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's weird. I didn't get an edit conflict, and I'm pretty darn sure I removed the original {{unblock}}. Sorry, no, what you did was just fine, it looks as though WP glitched up for some reason. You can get the new one. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

WTF?

What the hell is going on? What happened to Byzantium!!!! Tourskin (talk) 05:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

That would appear to be the result of an accident resulting from an attempt to fix some page move vandalism. I'm fixing it now, thanks for notifying me. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

No probs, so long as its reversible lol. Tourskin (talk) 06:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if it wasn't, we'd have kinda been in some trouble there.... >_> Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

But hey at least we get to redesign the article. Tourskin (talk) 06:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

*laughs* Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

I hope you got my pseudo acceptance of your offer of adoption and a bot just took it where it was supposed to be if not I will repost it tomorrow. ThanksEoag (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

According to the page's history, this is your first edit here - but that works for me! Good to hear back from you. I'm actually about to head off for the night (I'm up late due to multiple little admin emergencies), but I'll be more than glad to get you started off tomorrow. Sounds like you'll be more active then anyway. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 16	14 April 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Interview with the team behind one of the 2,000th featured articles	Image placeholders debated
WikiWorld: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: Board meeting, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Featured article milestone
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Wilson High School

Most likely it was. Right now the best way to handle the situation is revert and give polite warnings to those adding the encyclopedia style version and block the ones adding the threat-like version on sight.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I've been refreshing the page every few minutes to make sure nothing new gets added, same as you, it seems. If any new information regarding the threat itself, I can make the call. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Block?

I'm sorry to question your judgment, but I really feel a block is unnecessary here. Have a look at this diff [1]. The user removed what constituited vandalism, and they were indef blocked? Would you mind explaining? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 16:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, I've just noticed they've gone and made inappropriate pages, as documented on their talk page. I could only see one edit here. Sorry about that. Something I lack without the mop is the ability to see deleted contributions. (blush) Regards, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 16:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Was just about to say that. Yes, their page creations had a similar pattern to the IP edit, so I figured I could get two vandals with one block through the autoblocker. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, its an error that was inevitable for me to make without being able to view deleted contributions. I didn't mean to question your judgment at all, just when I did what I'd call a "poor man checkuser", comparing the contributions of the IP to the contributions of the user, that wasn't deleted, it didn't appear there was any reason to block. I'm sure if I could've seen the deleted edits, this wouldn't have happened. My sincere apologies. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 16:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:AIV

Problem is, they DON'T STOP. I don't want to argue, but you have to admit that report had a shred of reason behind it. They started vandalizing RIGHT after account creation. 21655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 23:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

And you do have a point, but we get tons of reports every day, and I've seen other reports of yours that were a tad premature. Your help is appreciated, but don't get too trigger-happy. Thanks again. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not trying to come across as trigger-happy, but okay. Point taken. 21655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 23:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

72.187.96.201

Hello Hersfold. Just a general observation to guide you on your admin path ... I know you weren't involved in what came before it, but in the future this would probably merit a note on my talk page. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ack. Sorry, my apologies. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:AIV

I see, that makes sense. But I still think that at least an edit summary, or at best a talk page message, would have been optimal. No big deal. Thanks, toresbe (talk) 11:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Why I made a point to come by. Sorry about that. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Trip Johnson block

I highly endorse this block. Without posting several dozen diffs to you here, I have had it with this user - so much that I temporarily stopped participating in the MilHist project because Trip was so insanely difficult to work with. Many other users have had the same problem; just this morning I was debating escalating it to a RfC or something similar just to start documenting the disruptions, policy violations, personal vendettas and maverick attitude that he has. Anyway, long story short, thanks for stepping in here and taking a look at what's going on, I really appreciate it. Tan | 39 18:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Just reviewing unblocks. It is helpful to know he has a history of this, though, and I'll keep it in mind if he requests again. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I saw that. I posted an (almost) identical message on the blocking admin's page, too. Thanks again, I appreciate your attention here. Tan | 39 18:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

One parser fcn. question

Hiya, quick question as I've had more time to look at this and play around some. Near the bottom it says: #rel2abs: Converts a relative link to a direct link - for example, /Subpage is a relative link which can be converted to the direct link, User:Hersfold/Adopt/AdvancedTemplates/Subpage.

Using the Museums Wikiproject as a template, I could theoretically use that for a future sub-project/taskforce of Galleries and it woul d be WikiProject Museums/Gallery for example? Thanks again for all your help with this TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 22:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeesss... I think. I haven't used that one very much (as in, at all), I just know it's there, and it works. But I'm pretty sure that's what you could use it for. If that does ever happen, and you can't figure it out, let me know (as I'm sure you will anyway :-P) and I'll play around with it some. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, never saw this. Yep, definitely noy shy about asking for help :) Thanks for all you've given TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 21:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Image deletions

Hey, no problem about the image deletions. To make a long story short I got a hold of a flickr user and asked him to change the CC licenses of a couple and he did, but then switched them back after a disagreement. Like I said, long story. I never got a chance to ask for them to be deleted, so I figured I'd just wait for a good samaritan like yourself to come along and delete them. However, two of the images you deleted are genuine GFDL images: Image:International School of Amsterdam.jpg and Image:Riga summit security.jpg. I'm not really sure why you lumped those in with the others, since those were GFDL while the others were Creative Commons. The first should already have an OTRS ticket, the second is brand new and I just sent a letter to the OTRS system today, so it'll take a while to get read and updated. Both should have their papers and what not taken care of, so like I said I'm not really sure why those got deleted too. Please get back to me about those two. Thanks. Drewcifer (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The Flickr pages for both of them said they were under copyright, not the GFDL. If there is an OTRS permission ticket in for them, the volunteer should be able to undelete them once it comes up. Sometimes those tickets take a while to process. If it takes a while, you can send in another email asking what's going on. Sorry for the confusion, and thank you very much for being so amiable about this. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The ISA photo was uploaded (and tagged, if I remember correctly) months ago, so no OTRS volunteer is going to come across it any time soon (I presume because it's already been filed away, or something). As for the other photo I literally sent the GFDL permission today, so it's still waiting to be read and confirmed. But in my experience with as many GFDL photos I've uploaded, a photo won't get tagged unless it's already up and running. I've never had a photo un-deleted by an OTRS volunteer, I've always had to get it reinstated before the fact, obviously by an administrator, so that the OTRS volunteer can come along eventually and confirm the ticket. Also, as far as I know, WP policy tends to assume good faith of the uploader in letting an image stay up until GFDL permission is confirmed. Hence the instructions that I've read say upload the image, send the permission to OTRS, and wait for the image page to be updated. Therefore, by definition, there's going to be a period where the image is in no-permission limbo. I'm not sure if that's the best way to do things, but there's plenty of precedence and that's what I've experience 99% of the time myself. So, in both cases, I think the best solution would be to un-delete the images, since the first one should already be tagged, and the second one won't get tagged unless it's up and running. If you prefer I'll avoid putting the images up onto any page until everything is sorted out. Drewcifer (talk) 22:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Neither image was tagged - I just double-checked the deleted pages. I'm checking with a volunteer now to see what's going on. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored the Riga image, as the volunteer confirmed that they had permission for it. He should be tagging the image soon, if he hasn't already. As for the ISA photo, he couldn't find any record of the ticket, and there is no OTRS tag in the file history. I'd recommend you send it in again - once it's received, it'll be undeleted (they do undelete things where needed, don't worry). Sorry for the confusion, but again, we can't have it up here unless it's "on the books." Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I just resent the GFDL permission for the ISA photo. Let me know if there's any hang-ups. Drewcifer (talk) 23:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

My helpme template

Many thanks for your assistance. Erechtheus (talk) 04:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. You know what to do if it goes wrong again for some reason. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Protection

How do u protect pages? I've noticed vandalism in the histories of some pages but found adding protection templates didn't work.I could still edit even when logged out.Xp54321 (talk) 01:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Only admins can place protection on pages - so please don't add protection templates to articles yourself, they won't do it and should never be used as a bluff. If you feel a page needs protection in accordance with policy, you can request it at WP:RFPP. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Commenting out Commons images

Hi Hersfold...I saw this edit - why are you commmenting out images from the Commons? When the local copy is deleted we want the Commons copy to show through. Kelly ^hi! 20:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I accidentally left a box checked when I used Twinkle - I thought I'd managed to stop it before it kept going. I'll undo all those edits, sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment at User talk:72.0.36.36

But I would like to note that WP:3RR lists clear violations of non-free content policies as being exempt from 3RR. This was an exceptionally clear case. In fact, "Yankee for Life" hasn't even been released yet (note pre-order status at [2]), making it also violate WP:NFCC #4. That said, I don't exceed three removals anyways in doing this work, and only butted up against three twice, seeking outside input on both occasions. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 21:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I know - I didn't say anything about 3RR violations. Thanks for bringing it up. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Motto Project Question

I've seen your involvement with the project and was wondering why no one has said anything about the motto I put in the nominations section. Its been there for at least 4 days.    Juthani1    01:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you placed it in the wrong section, where we put mottos that have already been voted on and are waiting to be archived or added to the schedule. I've moved it back up to the "In Review" section and left a comment. You may want to work on the motto a little - mottos are supposed to relate to Wikipedia somehow by reflecting the spirit of the community, and I'm really not seeing how the motto as it currently stands does that at all. I'd suggest adding some links, and perhaps providing a funny or witty answer to the question, to both give the motto some meaning and make it "pop". Thanks for your suggestion, though. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for relpying. I will fix it up or change it.    Juthani1    19:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice close

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Brilliant close of the Giovanni di Stefano AFD fiasco.--WaltCip (talk) 23:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I was worried I was going to get shouted at by someone for keeping it, but this is definitely much better. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitely agreed. You read my comments, so of course you know I am biased, but I must say that the closing rationale was well-written and got to the meat of issue. I think the lack of a challenge is a testament to that. Best regards, SorryGuy  Talk  02:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni di Stefano

I was just wondering if you intended to remove the "IMPORTANT" message. I don't have an opinion one way or another, but clearly someone does. :) Enigma ^message 07:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I sort-of-kind-of did - the main reason for keeping the article is that editors shouldn't have their editing affected by legal threats, and I feel as though that needs to be reflected in the article. If someone feels like adding it back in, I don't care enough to stop them, but I'm not going to add it back in myself either. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, just wondering why you didn't leave something in the edit summary. I think it's a silly warning because it's a frivolous attempt at bullying. Enigma ^message 13:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

<Excellent close, Hersfold. And one of the best "closing statements" I've ever read. It should easily eliminate the need for a high-drama DRV, which I initially thought was inevitable, Thanks to you, a DRV is no longer inevitable, but rather, it is ill-advised. Excellent work, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Stop

I am requesting you have no further interaction with me. You should be embarrassed that you unblocked GSTS who was recently indefinitely blocked for racist commentary, which whether intentionally or unintentionally, enabled and provided succor to a horrible anti-Semite. You should find something else to do instead of stalking me. Goodbye. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 15:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Question concerning harmful community members and their edits

I have a question about drawing community attention to one or two members of the community who I believe to be harmful and intentionally biased in their editing. These members make repeated edits to the same article, removing anything they deem to be undesirable without engaging in community discussion. All attempts to communicate with these members 1-on-1 have been ignored and I'm left with little recourse. Understand, I'm not seeking punishment but rather want to know whether there is a forum to make these members actions visible to others so that their actions are recognized, letting the community make a decision as a whole. What would be your recommended actions in this case? I will refrain from mentioning names and specifics at the moment but am prepared to do so at a moments notice. Thanks. --Novan Leon (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, you might try opening a Request for comment about the conduct of these users, which would help gather some consensus on what's going on. If these editors are breaking the three-revert rule, you can report them at the 3RR noticeboard. If you don't feel either of those would be appropriate, you could post at the incidents noticeboard. Without more specifics, though, I'm afraid I can't help you too much. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Column

Thanks a lot! I knew it was something like that, but I couldn't get it right. Thanks, Grsz^talk 16:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 17	21 April 2008	About the Signpost

BLP deletion rules discussed amidst controversial AFD	Threat made against high school on Wikipedia, student arrested
Global login, blocking features developed	WikiWorld: "Disruptive technology"
News and notes: Wikimania security, German print Wikipedia, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes	WikiProject Report: The Simpsons
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Andy Ennis

Well, speedy-deleting is only for articles that don't claim notability at all (at least, that's the criterion you used), so your deletion was inherently invalid. This article clearly claims notability - whether it is sufficient notability is a separate question; speedying is only for articles that do not purport to be about a subject of any importance. In any case, being a member of a notable band does meet WP:MUSIC, criterion #6. Two separate independent references also qualify under #1. If you still think it should be deleted, you should bring it to AfD (or you could prod it, but I'll dispute it, so it'll go to AfD anyway). Tuf-Kat (talk) 04:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Criteria 6 applies to bands, not to individuals - at least, that's what the wording of it would seem to imply. After double-checking, though, I guess I owe you an apology - for some reason I thought the article had been created by someone else, looking at it on newpages. If I'd noticed you were an admin (and I would have, I use a script for that), I'd have spoken to you first. I'll not AfD it, but would strongly encourage you to expand the article ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

The wording's kind of weird, but it's not meant to apply strictly to bands (all criteria apply to any individual or group). The criterion says the subject "contains a member who..."; in this case, the subject consists of only one person, who is the member who... Anyway, #1 still qualifies. I am planning on expanding - I'm working on music of Baltimore, and am making some stubs at the moment. I hope to fix up most of them soon. (You might have been confused because there was an article with the same title, created and deleted as non-notable some time ago, but that was about a different Andy Ennis, and it didn't claim notability.) If you want to be reassured, you can look through Google Books at "Ray Charles: Man and Music" By Michael Lydon, which contains some pretty significant content about Ennis and his influence on the obviously very notable Ray Charles (I can't really expand the stub based on it now, because it's a bunch of kind of isolated tidbits and the article would read very disjointed, but anyway, you can see some more detailed evidence of notability there). Tuf-Kat (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I could have sworn there was a different article in the deletion log, but I don't see it now... I checked it when I created the article, cuz sometimes somebody created a bad stub that was rightfully deleted even if the topic theoretically deserved an article, but it was just something about a Australian student whose only notability was all the girls at his school admiring his muscles, maybe I'm mixed up with one of the other stubs I made. Tuf-Kat (talk) 05:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Help

Can you help me help wikipedia by making me a Wikipedia rollback? --Megapen (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay - I've taken a look at your contributions, and I can't see that you've had much experience in dealing with vandalism yet. Take some time learning the ropes manually first - since rollback is intended to be used only for cases of obvious vandalism, I'd like to see that you know what you're getting into first. I noticed that you'd also been declined rollback fairly recently, presumably for the same reason. Do some manual reversions for a while, and come back when you've got some experience. Happy editing! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

How do you add those pictures on users' talk pages when they commit vandalism?Xp54321 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You can find a list of the warning templates we use here. Don't forget to sign your posts! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!!!Xp54321 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello, I'm User:RyRy5. I am asking if I can be adopted by you. I have been here for 2 months and 1 week but I believe I still need alot of experience. But I don't think I will participating in your program you created because I'm alraedy in one. Please look at User:Steve Crossin/Adoption/RyRy5 to clarify. Do you accept?--RyRy5 (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I already have an adoptee, unfortunately, Eoag (talk · contribs). At this point, I'm not sure I'd have the time to finish things up with you, as I'll probably be going on an extended wikibreak starting in mid-to-late May. I'll probably only just barely manage to finish up with Eoag as it is. I've been talking with Steve recently, though, and it looks like he's getting a good program set up for you. I know he's a very competent Wikipedian, and there's plenty of others around who will be able to help you if you need it. If you've got a question and Steve isn't around, feel free to ask me, but I'm afraid I'm not really able to officially adopt you just now. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, and I do have one question. I would like your opinions on Turn 2 Foundation, if it is ready for WP:DYK nomination. I would also like your opinions if it needs improvement.--RyRy5 (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It's way too short. An article should be a minimum of 1,500 characters, excluding lists, tables, references, and infoboxes. You'll need to expand it considerably within the next few days to meet that. As for other improvements, you really need to find some references that aren't related to the foundation. A source is not considered reliable if it has a relation to the subject, and DYK will not accept your "hook" unless it is backed up by a reliable source. It also reads as slightly promotional - you may want to try to work on the tone of the article somewhat to work on that (one thing in particular would be to refer to Jeter by his last name throughout). Hope that helps some. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that it was too short but I didn't really notice the others. Thanks for your time.--RyRy5 (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk: Richard Sternberg

I apologize if this is asking too much but I wanted to get your input on a change I've made to the Richard Sternberg article. I've explained this change at the bottom of the Talk:Richard Sternberg page under "Opening Paragraph". The primar reason I'm asking for input from a third party is that 've already run into conflict with several rather adamant contributors who have already removed my contrbutions and refuse to discuss the matter with me. -Novan Leon (talk) 14:14, 28 Aril 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the article history, it would seem that one of the reasons people are reverting your edit is because of the reference - while it is good that you're providing one, it needs to be from a third-party site, not affiliated with Wikipedia or Mr. Sternberg. Also, WP:NPOV does not means that you have to "balance" an article with pro- and con- points of view: giving [[WP:UNDUE|undue weight] to a minority concern can alter the neutrality of an article significantly. For example, if 9 out of 10 dentists say that Crest toothpaste is the best brand, you may want to mention that dentist #1 doesn't say so, but there's no need to explain in too much detail hy he feels that way, or mention which brand he considers to be the best (or why). Based solely on edit summaries, those seem to be the man reasons, however adiscussion on the matter would certanly help out. Just remember, don't keep fighting over it during the discussion - let a consensus come out, then act accordingly. I probably won't get too muh more involved in this, due to some past conflicts I've had with one of the editors involved that I would rather not risk accidentally inflaming again (for everyone's sake), but I ca keep an eye on things if you like. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the insight. My concerns are multi-facetted. First, several of those making the reversions are refusing to discuss the changes with me, and one in particular has been especially hostile to discussion (mayb you know who I'm referring to), even to the point of deleting my requests fordiscussion from their talk pagewithoutso much as a response. I'm now attempting to draw in conversation with third parties not directly involved with the changes. Second, in this instancethere is no clear majority/minority. Each side of the controversy claims heir side is in the majority, with a number of facts to support either side. Third, the reference supporting the statement against R. Sternberg's position n the controversy is taken directly from the party involved. Fourth, the reference I provided presenting R Sternberg's position on the issue is presented as his opinion only and makes not unsupportable claims. That said, I digress. I respect your desire not to be too involved and I will do my best to facilitate a discussion before taking further action. --Novan Leon (talk) 18:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)