Jump to content

User talk:Tabercil

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Testales (talk | contribs) at 16:49, 23 November 2010 (→‎Restoration of Breanne Benson: r + thx). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

12 13 14 15

Stupid mistake

I actually meant to put down that Mercy wasn't renewed for second season, forgot to proofread. My apologies. QuasyBoy (talk) 5:39, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on the Snooki discussion page BUT

I'm afraid they're at it again.

I see that someone has reverted it yet again (Talk:Nicole Polizzi) then copied and pasted The View dialogue I wrote out but added at the end "Snooki: I'm more of a Chilean Snooki: I want smush-smush!" the latter line which was not part of her exchange with Joy Behar.

I also see in the article Jersey Shore (TV series) that under the Cast section for Nicole Polizzi someone has written she is "Italian Arabic" which would be vandalism.

I have never reverted anything before and I will try to put everything back as it was but since I'm a first timer at that I would appreciate it if you could check to see if I've done it correctly. Thanks and Best Regards, Ava Slinkybinky (talk) 05:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

I assume you are the manager of this page, which means you certainly have the power to determine appropriate links. But I really didn't think adding a link that can guide interested people to Thora Birch content in their local libraries is spam. It isn't like there are Google ads on that page. But as I said, you're the arbiter. So be it. I have to admire the control that keeps spurious links from polluting the resource. Matkatamiba (talk) 05:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for butting in but the link doesn't work for me. So, spam or not, I don't see the point in keeping it if it doesn't work. Dismas|(talk) 05:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My problem wasn't whether the link worked or not, but rather whether it met the test of WP:EL, and in my opinion it didn't meet that standard for Thora's article. Tabercil (talk) 12:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any proper discussion where the inclusion of this website has been discussed? Because right now I see over 500 edits by a WP:SPA account adding this site, and I don't like it one bit. Nymf hideliho! 22:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's on a lot of articles... the template transclusion count currently stands at 3613. Scrolling through the list shows the bulk of them appear to be authors - e.g. Gerald Massey, W. P. Kinsella, Truman Capote. Then you get the ones that are Matkatamiba's contributions such as Kelly Clarkson, Erika Christensen and Mackenzie Astin, where they're actors and recording artists. Then you get the flat out strange - hello, Southern Railway (Great Britain) and Sexual Compulsives Anonymous!
Now, digging through I came across a mention in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 18#Proposal:_Worldcat_link about it which then led me to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 2#Worldcat_link which was the first publicization of it. A search of the Admins' board here comes up a mention of it at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Community_sanction/Archive2#Adding_100.2B_external_links where one editor placed Worldcar links on 100 articles and got a tentative debate about it. Nothing seems to have been resolved there though either way... it may be worth bringing this up at one of the formal discussion sites (e.g., Village Pump, Admin board) to try and get this resolved one way or the other. Tabercil (talk) 23:25, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although it may appear that my account is single-purpose, it isn't. I've added to the Stanislaus River page and will be working up a page on the non-profit group Friends of the River. It's just that I when I get going on a particular project, I tend to go after it. However, given the concerns raised I will suspend the linking activity (which I still think adds useful value to those pages) until any concerns can be resolved. Matkatamiba (talk) 23:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archive links for this page

Your navbox (or whatever it's called) stops with archive 14, but there appear to be more. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:08, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Curious... I had assumed the archive bot (MiszaBot III) would both create the archive page as well as update the navbox with the new entry. Maybe it missed the creation step. In any case I've manually added it to the box. Tabercil (talk) 17:13, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Deletion review for Rachel Roxxx

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Rachel Roxxx. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Hixteilchen (talk) 22:52, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Elizabeth Mitchell

well if I know its true. I f I am doing such a bad job then could you find reliable sources to prove it because it did say before on this page that she was married to chris soldevilla on june 13th 2004 and that they have a son named C.J. born 4th september, 2005. And that they live on bainbridge island washington. So could you repost that with a reliable source please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mua27 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google is your friend. Spend a few minutes going through Google News and you find an article in People magazine that pretty closely states what you're trying to add. Tabercil (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

look it says on Gary bakewell's wikipedia page that he and Elizabeth were in a relationship. Could you please do this because it was fine before obviously not for you so make it to your liking please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mua27 (talk • contribs) 09:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. There was no source on the Gary Bakewell page that backed it up, and Wikipedia cannot be used as a source for information. From here: "Wikis, including Wikipedia and other wikis sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation, are not regarded as reliable sources." And yes, I did do some searching for sources elsewhere on the net for sources that Elizabeth and Gary were in a relation ship and could not locate any that I considered a reliable source. And per the biography of living people policy: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." So that's that. And a warning: attempting to readd the Elizabeth/Gary relationship without providing a reliable source will be considered vandalism. Tabercil (talk) 15:13, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gary, C.J. and home

me again. It is a well known fact that Elizabeth Mitchell was romantically linked to Gary Balewell. It was also rumored that they were at one point married and have since divorced. Could you plese find a reliable source to reference this fact. It has also been stated by Elizabeth herself, that her son is named Christopher Joseph, (C.J), after her husband and her father, would you please find a reliable sorce for this also. Finally, she has said on mayn occasions that she, her husband and her son live on Bainbrigde Island, Washington, when she is not shooting V or any other projects. Please find a reliable source for that also. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mua27 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of that may be true. Or it may not be. The burden is on *you* to find sources for content you believe should be added. Don't expect others to do it for you. Jack Merridew 16:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. I looked and could not find any reliable source for Gary, and I was looking for that. As for CJ's name source, and where they live... I didn't look for it. As Jack says, the onus is on you to come up with the source - from Wikipedia's verifiability policy: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Tabercil (talk) 20:14, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Restoration of Breanne Benson

I would like to ask to to move that article from my user space back to main article space. Morbidthoughts has apparently recreated it already by copy/paste but I see no point to lose the history here especially to prevent to re-do some mistakes and since that was the reason to actually userfy it. I don't think he wouldn't mind and already informated him on his talk page. The actress is now nominated for two awards for 2011 + the nomination of 2005. Moreover she is will be Penthouse Pet of the Month (January) so I think that is enough to confirm notability. Or has that article to be taken to a DRV? Testales (talk) 05:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the net effect is the same either way - her article is now present again. The only difference I can see if that he's (rightly I think) knocked the information from the Hustler article out. I'll make the same change in yours then move it. Tabercil (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I had her read over the article initially and she confirmed the now removed facts also in several live chats even though they may not serve as good source. So this information was correct, there was no risk to falsely claim something critical about the subject and therefore I had let it where it was. The actual main point here (beside the advantages of a complete history) was frankly Morbidthoughts blatant ignorance of the work that I had put into that article and his action to simply to re-create it by copy/paste is furthermore clearly contrary to the policies and procedures of Wikipedia, as can be read here "Do not move or rename a page by copying/pasting its content, because doing so fragments the edit history. (Wikipedia's copyright license requires acknowledgement of all contributors, and editors continue to hold copyright on their contributions unless they specifically give up this right. Hence it is required that edit histories be preserved for all major contributions until the normal copyright expires.). So thank you very much again for fixing that. Moreover let me add that you know that for WP:P* BLPs it is especially difficult to find sources that everbody would accept as reliable, even the AVN site gets regulary attacked as beeing promotional and therefore not acceptable as RS (just recently again, just see the discussions arround Rachel Roxxx and the related notability talk page). Let me also - without any specific implications - mention that Morbidthoughts actually has far more options to verify some facts than me if he only wants to since he is working for a known secondary source (IAFD). So I hope you can understand my point of view to this. Testales (talk) 16:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While you're at it, can you unsalt and restore Rachel Roxxx's article since she's added 3 more AVN noms this year? Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done as well. Tabercil (talk) 15:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tabercil&oldid=398464099"