User talk:C.Fred

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

Welcome to my talk page!

Please sign and date your comment (by adding ~~~~ at the end) to assist the bot that archives this page.
Please add a new thread to the bottom of the page if you wish to leave me a new message.
- If you leave me a message here, I will reply here and leave a {{Talkback}} template on your talk page, unless you indicate that you are watching my page or no talkback message is necessary.
- If you are responding to a message I left on your talk page, I encourage you to reply there. Please leave a {{Talkback}} template here so I know about the message, unless I indicate that no talkback is necessary in my message.
This page is set for automatic archiving every 7 days. I will remove talkback messages as acknowledgment that I have read the related reply, and I reserve the right to summarily remove any uncivil comments.

Thank you, and happy editing!

HIII

I only disagree with the term cult leader as Meher Baba never declared, himself to be a cult leader in any publication. (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Since it appears that multiple reliable sources have classified him otherwise, it is within Wikipedia's guidelines to state that he's been described as a cult leader. Omitting the description could be seen as violating WP:NPOV. —C.Fred (talk) 18:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meher Baba never declared himself to be a cult leader

(Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Irrelevant. Most cult leaders probably don't; it's a decision made my sociologists and the like. Hence the use of independent reliable sources to support the claim rather than works of Baba himself. —C.Fred (talk) 18:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meher Baba

in his interviews to charles purdom / meredith starr - Meher baba (see meher baba references) declared himself that he is Non dogmatic and his mission to west is not to establish any Cult or religion - He never classified himself as a cult leader

(Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Same as the above. —C.Fred (talk) 18:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further,

Sociologists can make several claims based on their personal research - That doeant mean u classify him as cult leader (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:29, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

This is the wrong venue for this discussion; I'm not the audience you need to persuade. Talk:Meher Baba is a better venue; that's where you'll be able to build consensus for your view (or have consensus demonstrated the other way). —C.Fred (talk) 18:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Respected editor,

Info about Meher baba whethe he is a cult leader or not is not required in Don E Stevens article.

(Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

QSY. When you're back from your block, open discussion at Talk:Meher Baba. —C.Fred (talk) 18:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stepping away

I note your comments above about including content from independent reliable sources. Many of the cited additions I have made regarding Baba have been reverted by other editors. I'm going to step away from the articles for now, as it is clear there are some editors who are quite passionate about defending them, and it is not a good use of energy on my part to engage if other editors are just reverting without discussing the merits of bringing an alternative view. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The One and Only Ramblin' Reck

As an avid fan of the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets, an extremely involved campus contributor, and a caretaker for the Ramblin' Reck, you are wrong in MANY areas of the "Ramblin' Wreck" article. You obviously are not a true fan of Georgia Tech as you do not know the proper name of our mascot. The Ramblin' Reck is properly spelled with an "R" and not a "W". I don't know where you got your information, but it is wrong. The media and Athletic Association have been wrong for a while in their spelling, but the true history is correct and credible. The original archives of the Georgia Institute of Technology mention the "Ramblin' Reck".

I was only changing your article for the misspelled name of the beloved name of my most cherished school. I'm glad that for at least an hour, the Wikipedia article was correct in its spelling. You can undo changes from true, knowledgeable Georgia Tech fans, but you will never be correct. Your sources and reasonings will always be flawed if you continue misname the Ramblin' Reck. You are incredibly disrespectful, and I was only trying to correct your article as many Wikipedia users do on a regular basis.

Before you try to oppress Wikipedia users and undermine the free speech of Wikipedia, you should get your facts straight. People are only trying to help before more people are misinformed about the topics of your articles.

Embaker823 (talk) 17:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC) THE RAMBLIN' RECK[reply]

Wrong is a matter of perspective here. The archives may mention the "Ramblin' Reck," but they probably also refer to the football team as the "Golden Tornadoes." The latter is archaic; the former is a deprecated or, at best, alternate spelling.

The citation in the article for the spelling of Ramblin' Wreck is to the Institute's Communications and Marketing department. Ramblin' Wreck is registered as a trademark of the Institute. If Ramblin' Reck were the correct spelling, or even an accepted alternate spelling, wouldn't Ma Tech have obtained a trademark on it as well?

That said, if you have reliable sources—and preferably secondary sources—to validate the Reck spelling as common (other than in the name Ramblin' Reck Club, which does and has historically used that spelling), I encourage you to open discussion of the matter at Talk:Ramblin' Wreck.

Thank you, and (insert The Good Word here). —C.Fred (talk) 17:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as a Tech alum, Reck is consistently and traditionally used internally at Tech, and Wreck externally, probably to save explanations concerning the loss of a W. Wreck is perfectly acceptable for use on WP: Reck is fine too, but it is more of an inside thing. It's certainly not disrespectful to place the W in front, and it's worth noting that there is no such thing as "freedom of speech" on Wikipedia, nor are members of the Reck Club entitled to feel oppressed by Wikipedia content. I'd say the Alumni Association would have the final say on the matter, not necessarily the Reck Club, which can spell it any way they like. The lede could read "The Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech is the 1930 Ford Model A Sport coupe that serves as the official mascot of the student body at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The Wreck (or as traditionally spelled by Tech students and alumni, the Reck), is present at all major sporting events and student body functions. Acroterion (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Alumni Association have no affiliation with the Reck. The Reck is maintained and operated solely by Reck Club which does not even receive money from the Institute. The Athletic Association would be the closest affiliated Tech department but that is solely because Reck Club appears at their events. Reck Club was formed and operates for the "education and promotion of Tech spirit, history and tradition." They don't just "spell it any way they like". They are the ones who maintain and research said traditions. While I agree that externally the use of a W is appropriate to avoid confusion I do not see a problem with using 'Reck' throughout the article with a proper disclaimer. Hopefully this will help dispel the common misconception that 'Wreck' is the proper spelling. --Jackets1991 (talk) 18:50, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably best stated on the article's talkpage so it's accessible to other editors. It seems to me that the spelling has veered more in favor of the W version since I was at Tech in the late 70s/early 80s - even the Technique uses it in the references, despite the Reck Club's efforts. The problem in Wikipedia terms is the lack of verifiable sources according to WP policies for the Reck version. Perhaps you could find some good references that don't rely on (not-extremely-useful-as-references-on-Wikipeda) Reck Club policy (which is what I was really trying to say)? Acroterion (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meher Baba

HIII

Glad to speak to you again. Actually, The indications I gave about the Cult leader statement in Meher Baba's article is apparently vandalism, as you could notice.

The sources the user indicated may be reliable but the interpretation of those sources form the user may not be true. This is what I tried to explain it to the other editor.

(Dragonbooster4 (talk) 13:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

I disagree with the assessment of the statement as vandalism. It might not be an accurate interpretation, and there may be other issues at play, but I'm not convinced that it was done in bad faith. —C.Fred (talk) 13:20, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

== Okay ==

(Dragonbooster4 (talk) 14:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Possible socking by Kumaripriya?

Hi

An IP has today edited User:Kumaripriya with this.

In itself, no big deal - the edit is merely formatting etc and it is safe to assume that this is the registered user doing things while logged out.

However, also today, a fairly dormant account has edited an article on which Kumaripriya was warring & that has had no action for a while - see here. The images are already tagged by Fut. Perf but could this possibly be a sock? It seems to be quite a coincidence, especially since Kumaripriya has a history of working in Christianity-based articles and the alternate account has also made these edits. - Sitush (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IAC-Israel Museum → Drkup(IMJ)

Current name: IAC-Israel Museum (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · target logs · block log · list user · global contribs · central auth · Google) (ping user)
Requested name: Drkup(IMJ) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · target logs · block log · list user · global contribs · central auth · Google)
Previous renames: current user, target user, Queue: open req, closed req
For global renamer: rename user
Datestamp: 01:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Reason: See above IAC-Israel Museum (talk) 01:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC) IAC-Israel Museum (talk) 01:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to post this request at WP:Changing username for it to be acted on, not on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to follow link but was told in edit mode that this is not the place to post requests, where is the right place? Thank you 04:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

See your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 05:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do you have two accounts, this one and Drkup (talk · contribs)? I ask because the reply on this move came from the second account. —C.Fred (talk) 05:12, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Could you also block User:Textenwikisearcher? I would also like to know whether these edits: [1] & [2] could be hid (so that their edit summaries are not shown in history). Thanks again! --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:49, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done and done. I'd debated about offering to revision-delete one of the messages right after I leveled the block; your comment of "amusing trolling" is why I didn't offer. But you asked, so I've cleared them. —C.Fred (talk) 21:53, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand. Thanks for the help. --Omnipaedista (talk) 22:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

J.C. Moreau recreated

Hello, C.Fred … You did a WP:CSD of J.C. Moreau (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) which has been recreated by the subject and author, Jcmoreau (talk · contribs) … perhaps they need a stronger warning, and perhaps WP:SALT the article? Happy Editing! — 70.21.24.28 (talk · contribs) _{17:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)}[reply]

Article deleted again, especially since it still infringes copyright. Level 3 warning left. —C.Fred (talk) 17:18, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UK year nav

You may wish to comment at Template talk:UK year nav. Moonraker (talk) 03:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resop picture

If I took a picture of Resop with my cell phone from the TV would that be alright? Thanks for your help