If you leave a message here, I will respond on your talk page,unlessI perfectly know you are watching this page.
Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gee that was fast! ;) hang onto your hat, next week hubby and I are exploring Chiapas.... so lots of pics coming and articles to be (re)written!Thelmadatter (talk) 18:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since apparently you are watching my age I'll reply here. I personally do not like to invite people to review my GANs, FLCs and FACs because it would be considered as a canvassing vote. You should wait people to comment, it's normal when no one comments, very few people review featured candidates. Anyway you withdrew its nomination, so for now, you have to work more on it. Tbhotch* ۩۞19:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings! In reviewing our discussion on my talk page, I regret that I responded curtly to the objection you raised to my disambiguating talk page comments. I could have engaged you more respectfully, and I apologize for not having done so. Since you raise an interesting point, I will seek consensus of the community regarding my interpretation of talk-page editing policy before I make additional edits of this nature. Cheers! bd2412T18:28, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, can you check Talk:Haus of Gaga? A number of editors are apparently writing there that it is an A-class article. I'm completely baffled because the article is just shit. Are these all socks? Youu are better at it. — Legolas(talk2me)14:39, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
lol for the first, and for the second, probably. Either way, it hardly meets the C-class criteria of either Wikiproject. Tbhotch* ۩۞15:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tbhotch, I understand that SVG is preferred but If you go to the official website you can see the logo exactly as the version I uploaded, so this SVG version is a bad version, thanks for worry about Real Madrid logo but I think that is preferred an official version than a non-official SVG format against PNG. Also, for reasons of copyright is better a low resolution, my image complies this and is not the intention of Wikipedia to facilitate higher versions of non-free logos as SVG allows. A salomonic solution is to upload a SVG version of the image that I uploaded (you can download the EPS image at the source url that I put in the summary description: http://www.vflnet.com/infos/spain/real_madrid_cf/) but I don't know how to convert an EPS file to an SVG file, if you can do it for me, I will appreciate. Greetings tot-futboltalk19:55, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Halo (Beyonce) Copy edit request
Hi, I saw your request on the GOCE page and reworked the section so it should flow a lot better now. You'll note that I've removed a few sentences as some of them seemed to be somewhat synthy and the same refs were cited several times. I've added your talk page to my watchlist so it will be easier to keep the thread here if you have any comments. --Blackmane (talk) 00:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for doing it, and I have not problem with the changes, I didn't write that section, it was a friend of mine, I hope he does not get mad for it. Again, thanks. Tbhotch* ۩۞02:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for cleaning up after me
Hi, I notice you've been judiciously adding protection tags to articles when I (often) neglect to do so after protecting an article. Much appreciated! But I must say, this seems like drudge work suited to a bot. There's a bot to remove the tags. Isn't there a bot that can auto-tag protected articles?
No, it isn't exist. Only DUMBot remove templates, but there's no bot for add them. Anyway, I have not problem with it, I've done it by months. Just one of the thing very few humans still doing here. Tbhotch* ۩۞04:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, there again. I've already made a few changes to the article for the 83rd Academy Awards. If you noticed, I've added information on the production ceremony including how AMPAS and ABC decided to give unprecedented access to interactive content for the ceremony. I also addede the international broadcasters.
I've removed several bits of information in the "Voting Trends and Summary" sections that I feel are unverifiable or are irrelevant to the article.
Hello Tbhotch! I have nominated the above song article for an FA (third time). Since you commented on the first nom, I thought I should let you know about the third nom. Fee free to comment or o/s. Thank you. Novice7 (talk) 03:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, do you know how many supports would an article need to pass? I'm thinking "Irresistible" would fail this time too :( Novice7 (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea, I think at least three with no objections. Anyway, what's the problem, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth... will always exist, and, someday, they'll get tired of you and you'll be blocked ;). Just kidding, they will pass it, they are not to mean to let an editor open the 99th archive. When the article is ready, it'll pass. Tbhotch* ۩۞04:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found alternative sources for most of the dead links. Trouble with the TV Guide review. I know truthfully it was mentioned in one of the March issues of the magazine.
83rd Oscars controversies
I've found an article regarding Melissa Leo's utterance of 'fuck' during her Oscar speech.[http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1658810/melissa-leo-oscars-speech.jhtml
] Also, there was controversy regarding the Best Picture nominees montage shown at the end of the broadcast because it had dialogue from The King Speech being played over the montage which had clips for ALL ten best pic nominees. Several bloggers and columnists like Nikki Finke and Tom O'Neil lambasted the Academy for that decision.
Hi, Tbhotch. Being the Laker fan that I am :), I'm trying to give a crack at enhancing the quality of the 2010 NBA Finals article. Do you know any Wikipedia editor that specializes in sports? And do you have any tips in helping me improve that article?Birdienest81 (talk) 23:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch, don't you thin that was a little harsh, mate? Cowik is obviously not familiar with the intimate processes of TFA and didn't realise he was doing anything wrong. Please do try to explain what the problem is first, beofre taking someone's head off. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's impossible to me to try to explain people what's wrong with their edits, I do not speak your language, you know, so I cannot going throughout being polite when I don't know how to be polite. Tbhotch* ۩۞18:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Page Jizz (birding)
Hi, I'm with RCP, and I couldn't help but notice the little battle you were having with 86.183.217.14 when the page Jizz (birding) appeared on my Huggle feed. With all due respect, I don't see an issue with the edit that 86.183.217.14 made. Possibly you could provide me with an explanation? Thanks Bped1985 (talk) 19:27, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I posted my question before the IP user had posted that "I think it's funny" excuse. I fully understand now. Another question though, if you don't mind my asking, how is it that you got those warnings above this text box when someone goes to edit your talk page? I've seen this all over the place but have no clue on how to accomplish it. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you! Bped1985 (talk) 20:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Brabham
Thanks for your various anti-vandalism efforts today. I have reverted your final correction, not because I disagree with your logic but because I've checked and the anon editor, whether they know it or not, has got it right. The site I took the results from has made an error. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 00:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Huh?
The image I added was not uploaded by me, it was already on commons, ready for use. I assumed it was perfectly acceptable to use the image as similar images are used in the same article. I think the edit block warning is a bit much. Yonskii (talk) 01:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is to notify you that an RfC has been opened regarding proposed edits in Chevrolet Vega. The discussion is located here.
You star, thanks. You can work out the "For" statement via talk pages, or just be BOLD and work it out iteratively.
My thoughts are that in these respects, the Vega article should be significantly edited: it should reflect clearly the Vega's legacy, it's role in the US auto industry and it's marred track record. It should be considerably more concise. It should rely less on fan trivia and less than transparent sources. And it should include less of one editors photographs, personal vehicles and promo photos from General Motors. That's the basic thrust for me. 842U (talk) 21:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pending changes
I'll think about undoing some of those. What I've been doing is matching the length of the pending changes protection, and on the BLPs, that wound up indefinite. One of the BLPs and some of the non-BLPs I've removed protection completely. To answer your main question, yes, after 11 months, the two-month trial is finally over.—Kww(talk) 02:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for tracking me down and notifying me about the impending TFA for Edward III of England. I wrote it about five years ago, and it was in pretty bad shape by current standards. Fortunately I had the chance to go over it and get it ready for the big day. Had I not, it could have been embarrassing both for me and for Wikipedia. Lampman (talk) 00:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have full support from the Dzogchen people on wikipedia. See the discussions. You are the one who needs to be blocked from wikipedia. Thigle (talk) 03:55, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
a. there are no "discussions". I've looked at the talk pages of the articles you've been editing, and I don't see anything there. b. Your edits were simply not helpful and not in agreement with our guidelines. Calling Tbhotch and myself clowns or vandals is not going to help your case either; you can't strong-arm your way around here. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello my good friend. I see you have reverted my edits to the page on rainbows due to lack of sources.
Unfortunately at this time I cannot chase down a reference on the internet (my original source is from a natural world almanac), but I was able to find this picture of the Qingdai shootdown incident which shows the intruder making contact with the terrain.
I note that English is not your first language. In my tongue we have an idiom: "a picture is worth a thousand words". Perhaps this is better than a written source?
For the other incident I have nothing as yet, but will try my best to investigate this strange and troubling anomaly.
--60.243.239.25 (talk) 05:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC) I have edited this article , removed few things from the article which was poorly sourced to make article more reliable . Please do not add such things because there is no references for those facts .[reply]
Too wide a variety of IPs to range block, even with a soft block. Semi-protecting your talk page would get us part of the way, but it also would make him harder to identify. If you could give me a list of his top 20 or so articles, I could begin a cycle of semi-protecting his targets and trying to discourage him. It's up to you: if I protect your talk page, you get less annoyance, but he does more damage. If I don't semi-protect your talk page but semi-protect a target list you provide, he does less damage but you have to put up with more.—Kww(talk) 01:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure I'll do it tomorrow, but my main concern is: is it complete? Because it is not, it only covers the main/widely known awards 'round the globe, so that would be a problem. Tbhotch* ۩۞05:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, it is complete. Except a part of the lead. I have even included those "I can't pronounce" Swedish and Swiss award names too. And that too with one hand. Madonna should pay me sometimes I think. :P — Legolas(talk2me)05:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I checked some lists they seem to not add Razzie's anf The Rambling Man said that awards which are not backed by the phono or the Film division industry are best left out. What do you think? — Legolas(talk2me)07:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Expanding on the use of religious imagery ... and liberals alike." -> the whole paragraph is relevant to Madonna biography not to her "awards and nominations"
"Madonna's seventh studio album Ray of Light (1998) became one of her most critically acclaimed, recognized for its lyrical depth." -> you should mention that it was rewarded with many awards.
"Departing from Warner Bros. Records, Madonna signed an unprecedented $120 million dollar contract with Live Nation the same year." -> Irrelevant as well
" Considered to be one of the most influential women in contemporary music, Madonna has been known for continually reinventing her music and image and for retaining a standard of anonymity within the recording industry; she is recognized as an influence among numerous music artists" -> The same
"Madonna has won 217 awards from 408 nominations" -> contradicts the infobox
Awards
American Moviegoers' Awards -> Evita is linked twice
American Music Awards -> "been nominated for seventeen times" -> typo
AOL TV Viewer Awards
television -> overlinked
Madonna has won "Best TV Concert" award in 2002 -> "has won ... in 2002" grammatically incorrect
The Drowned World Tour and HBO are overlinked
Billboard -> should not those 4 awards be subsections?
Billboard Music of the '80s Poll Awards -> Into the Groove is overlinked on the table
Hollywood Walk of Fame -> in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, United States, -> North America, America, Earth...why not simply Hollywood, California?
International Rock Awards -> International Rock Awards (1989–1991) ... Madonna has won -> Which is the chance the IRA return?
Japan Gold Disc Awards:
why the Japanese text?
True Blue and Like a Prayer are overlinked
Juno Awards -> "won two of which" -> Is this correct?
MTV awards -> as Billboard
MTV Video Music Awards -> "Like a Virgin", "Express Yourself" are overlinked
MTV Artist of the Decade -> why are you mentioning the catfight?
MVPA Awards -> and so I wonder: Would Madonna be candidate to "Best Cinematography", "Best Special Effects" and "Best Make-Up", those awards go to the crew, and she was not part of it, was she?
UK Music Hall of Fame -> "along with The Beatles, Elvis Presley, Bob Marley and U2" -> relevance?
My main concern here is, as you know, that it is probably incomplete. Madonna has not won <500 awards in >20 years. Also, some of the awards listed here are not awards (e.g. Top Selling Female Rock Artist of the 20th Century), they are recognitions. Unless the page is called: "List of awards, nominations and recognitions received by Madonna" they should be removed.
I have gotten on the Ancestry.com website and have look up Robert Pattinson. Two main ones come up in to regard to his birthday. I believe it is the one that says just "Robert Thomas Pattinson" not the "Robert Douglas Thomas Pattinson." Also he has never stated that he has two middle names
--Beccamcr (talk) 04:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
May we please revert to the previous "shield" University of Delaware logo on aesthetic grounds? The new logo here is just plain *ugly* and too generic looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyclif (talk • contribs) 19:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, the best way to get someone to stop posting on your talk page is to totally ignore them. (I am perfectly watching your talk page, so you may reply here or on mine or at WQA or not at all.) Gerardw (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately "ignore" is as bad faith as my comment. The only difference is that they cannot report me to relevant noticeboards. Tbhotch* ۩۞20:14, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. Plus it's way less work for you. I don' think it's bad faith -- WP is voluntary and you're under no obligation to deal with anyone you don't want to. Gerardw (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I just saw you left a comment on Talk:Extranjera. Do you know how it's being released now? It's going to be a 14-song CD and a DVD, but 7 of the songs are the ones from Extranjera: Primera Parte. What do you think? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message20:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And would the Extranjera: Segunda Parte infobox have it as a studio album. Also, in the Harry Potter soundtracks, I only think they are merged for now because little is known about the second part. A lot more is known for the second part of Extranjera. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message20:48, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I think it depends on whether it charts separately or as one on charts. If it charts separately, I think it'd be best to split the articles. If not, then one should suffice. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message22:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It would seem that I have fallen within the sights of an immature adolescent with far too much time on his hands and a serious need for attention (or perhaps mental evaluation). I've semi-protected my talk page for now, but if you happen to stumble across any future idiocy, do feel free to revert it. Many, many thanks for the assist. Regards, PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Please be civil! Why are you terrorising me and posting intimidating messages? How is my edit to the lead not legitimate. The information is correct, and in fact it is supported by references provided. It was also present in the article on the other place, but is being censored out of the lead. Please stop harrasing me! Also, you delete my comment about CONTENT of the article from the talk page. That is borderline vandalism and abuse of other editors!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.220.89 (talk) 06:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are problems with your behavior. The edits are in no way disruptive, nor are they defamatory (perhaps you have problems with English, but are blinded by your arrogance)! The issue is if to mention this in the lead, as all these things are already mentioned in the article. If you could read, you could check it yuorself, instead of threatening people here!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.220.89 (talk) 06:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please move your issues with lead to the Kutner page to the relevant talk page, that you keep deleting from. Please NOTE that removing content from the TALK page, which is for discussion of disputes and resolution of issues like the one we obviously have with Kutner page lead, is far from civil and constructive behavior. It will not be resolved by you simply deleting the relevant page of TALK page, that you disagree with. This is borderline vandalism and WILL be reported to admin, if you keep trying to delete my part of discussion. Instead, put your issues on the talk page, not remove it from it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.220.89 (talk) 06:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. As you noted in your comment on 'requests for page protection', you are getting close to a 3RR violation on Lawrence Kutner. My suggestion would be to back off editing the page for a bit. Try to work things out through discussion. If that means the page is 'wrong' or 'biased' for a few days it isn't likely to be the end of the world. Barring some sort of potential legal action over the content of the page you usually shouldn't worry about it. Someone else is bound to come along and correct it OR in many cases the argumentative user will move on after a few days and things can be straightened out then. --CBD15:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
TGilmour GANs
Hey, I noticed you quick-failed a couple of TGilmour's good article nominations on articles he had nothing to do with. I was wondering can you please quick-fail his good article nomination of Eden Hazard, as well. I have spent a lot of time editing the article and, while it is very informative, I don't think it is polished enough to become a good article yet. Thanks. — JSRant Away23:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalization and punctuation
First of all, commas and other forms of punctuation are included in quoted text, regardless of whether they are included in the original text. Trust me, people can tell if the song has a comma in the title or not. I'd just like Wikipedia articles to be more grammatically correct.
Second, we don't have to use the word "number" all the time to denote a song's position on the charts. Feel free to check out other Wikipedia articles on musicians to confirm this. We also tend to capitalize the first letters of terms that denote chart positions, such as "number one" and "top five." Again, you can confirm this by reading Wikipedia articles or any other piece of writing that discusses songs.
Wait, so if Wikipedia doesn't use hashtags, then how come the page on Reba McEntire, which just happens to be a "good article," has a bunch of them in it? --DorkyA.N. (talk) 18:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Email
Hello, Tbhotch. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Thank you for figuring out the proper way to do it. And sorry for copyvio split. There was no edit conflict I understood what your intention was right way and it was definitely the more proper way for part one. Now I just got to figure out how to fix part two. Jhenderson77714:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
HI, there again. Apologize since I was too busy with school the last month, but I finally got a comprehensive peer review right here. Would you like to assist me in accomplishing some of these tasks? Birdienest81 (talk) 06:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You and Tibetan Prayer think that if there is a lot of information, then two articles. Im working on expansion as I visited the area over Semana Santa. Finding lots of info. Looks like Ill be keeping them separate.Thelmadatter (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help and advice, Tbhotch. It seems that the two of us really are like police when it comes to those Oscar ceremony articles.
By the way, I'm trying to update my user main page so you (and other Wikipedians) can get to know me and my interests a little better. Do you have any tips on how I can make my User page better as an identificiation. Also is there any good tips on how I can become more helpfulas an editor on Wikipdia? I've known this website for seven years.Birdienest81 (talk) 03:29, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! I was glad to see you added Aquí no hay quien viva to the relevant wikiprojects. :) I'm not sure about the relevance of one of them, though - wikiproject:Soap Operas. As far as I understand Aquí no hay quien viva is not a soap opera. I would appreciate your reply. :) Ben Gershon (Talk) 19:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tbhotch! Hope you're doing well :) I just finished expanding (expanded, ce not done yet) Irresistible. Can you re-assess it for me and if possible, add alt? Thanks in advance =) Novice7 (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
