User talk:Dgw

I'm finally getting back into this! Awesome! I started college in September 2011, and now I often pull up Wikipedia or Huggle for a bit as a break from homework. Did I mention that I think it's awesome?

You can leave me a message (last diff). Let me know of a mistake or a good edit, or just say hi!

Tuvok's status: Offline

LCARS Status Tab r74656

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dgw.

This is Dgw's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Hi, everyone. This isn't the most spiffy talk page you will ever see, but it's my belief that less is more. Besides, if the talk page is for talking, why decorate it? Leave me a message if you've got something chewing on your ear, or if you just want to say something to me. Please use the New section tab above unless you're replying to a discussion already present, in which case please edit only that section and indent your reply using one more colon (:) than the last person. Also, please remember to sign your posts.

Some notes about my responses:

I'll respond here if:
- You post a comment here (this will probably get you a {{talkback}} on your page to pop up that wonderful orange bar)
- I've moved a conversation here because it was off the original topic
I'll respond on your page if:
- I posted a comment there
I'll respond on the page I posted on if:
- I responded to a comment you left on another user's page
- I interjected in an already-ongoing conversation elsewhere

In general, I prefer to keep conversations together, so if I leave a comment on your talk page, I'd prefer to have replies there. However, if you don't want replies there, it's perfectly fine with me to have a back-and-forth between talk pages; I'll just double-post my comments on both my (this) page and yours. Note that I will probably change indent levels for your comment to make the conversation flow, but that's about it. My policy is generally to never interfere with other editors' talk preferences, so I'll generally accommodate whatever you want to do.

If you are a classmate of mine, please add the following to the end of your comment/question: Identifier (Fellow Student) ~~~~, where Identifier is either your first name or initials. That way, I can get an idea of who's talking to me. Thanks!

Page merging

Is there some reason Soushokukei_danshi and Herbivore_men shouldn't be merged? Fephisto (talk) 00:14, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I mistook your edit for vandalism. I'll undo my revert and warning on your talk page. Thanks for letting me know! Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 00:18, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*thumb up* Np, thanks. Fephisto (talk) 00:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Article

I apologize if I'm doing something wrong, but I am extremely dismayed to see that a single editor has recently changed the title of "California Polytechnic State University" to "California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo." This was done with no consensus whatsoever, and I am shocked to see it. The title has been "California Polytechnic State University" for as long as I can remember, and to unilaterally change it I think is absolutely wrong and goes against significant discussion on this issue. Since this has been done, the intro sentence is now changed--also highly controversial. I am happy to discuss this on the talk page, but feel that the editor who changed the ENTIRE ARTICLE TITLE is not being held to the same standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.136.142.236 (talk) 02:54, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand your dismay, and as I stated on your talk page a few moments ago I'm going to leave the dispute to you and other editors who know more about the situation. Cheers. I'll try not to bug you about it any more. :) Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 02:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I differ with 50.136.142.236. Consensus was reached for the move. It's 50.136.142.236 who is engaging in an edit war.-- Marco Guzman, Jr Talk 15:27, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, Marco. I will probably still stay mostly out of it, because I try to focus more on vandalism patrol than on raging disputes, but it's good to be more informed about the situation. Cheers, Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 04:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Polanski

I went ahead and removed the whole edit from the editor for now. I commend you through for attempting to find some middle ground for someone who was giving none :) Calmer Waters 03:16, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Regular reverts didn't seem to be working, and AIV was unresponsive. I was initially unaware of Polanski's conviction, which didn't help, but I'm glad someone else stepped in. Cheers! Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 03:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's time to give some thought to a remedy for future situations ;) Calmer Waters 03:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, boy. I have certainly considered it. I just haven't had the guts to pull the trigger on an RfA. What doesn't help is the fact that I've been dormant for the majority of the last few years. Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 03:31, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see that. Shame you didn't pull the trigger around June back then :). Maybe in a few months time after be active again for a bit. If you do decide later on, have any questions about it, or want a vetting, feel free to drop me a note, or wonder over to these guys. Kindly Calmer Waters 03:52, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution Female Disciples

I did not vandalise my own article. I merely added further references ,external links and citations. Please see Dispute Resolution for details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catherine Curran (talk • contribs) 06:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted only one of your edits, and ignored the rest once I realized I'd made a mistake. Taking it to Dispute Resolution is overreacting a bit, isn't it? Granted, I should have more proactively corrected my error, but I heard nothing from you until this. Please accept my apologies. Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 06:46, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have now formally responded to the dispute resolution thread. Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 07:13, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your recent counter-vandalism efforts, I see a long list of reverts and warnings in your edit history. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:41, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the WikiLove, Callanecc! Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 07:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

newbie

Sorry about that I will use the sandbox to practice for a while ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigdcelebrity (talk • contribs) 05:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ummm?

I finally got the story on there correctly and you still removed it? May I ask why?... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigdcelebrity (talk • contribs) 05:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the entries above yours, it's not formatted correctly. It has no bullet (entered in wikitext using a * at the beginning of the line) and appears only as a ^[num], on a line by itself, with no actual article text shown in the list.

At the very least, you should include the actor's name, one or two works they're well-known for, and some details about the tape in question. Read through some of the other entries to get a sense of what it should look like, and play around in that sandbox you just created. You can also experiment on the article itself, as long as you use the Preview button. :) Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 05:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... sorry for the mistakes ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigdcelebrity (talk • contribs) 05:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you learned everything you needed. I just made a couple tweaks. Nice job! Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 07:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help with my first edit! --Bigdcelebrity (talk) 07:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read changes to article before algorithmically deleting changes

You mechanically delete edits to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OHLC this page without reading or editing. It is fun have your own spambots you built or implemented, but Wikipedia is about human editors. I would appreciate it if you would explain why this link http://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/ohlcchart.asp#axzz21zLKMUA4 with a two sentence explanation is okay but this detailed link http://finvids.com/Chart-Pattern is not? The only thing that makes sense is an unintelligent bot is reviewing and not a human. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.228.121 (talk) 06:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Human editors generally don't go through the article to review every other external link when deciding if a new one should be kept. If I had been patrolling the recent changes when the Investopedia link was added, I would have no doubt deleted it (something I will go do soon after saving this message).

My main concern with the FinVids link is that you might have a conflict of interest with it. Secondarily, the site (like Investopedia) is plastered with ads, and further, calls on visitors to "Click "Like" & "+1" for each page". Moreover, the ads are not clearly separate from the content. Wikipedia articles should not link to low-quality sites.

Aside from the presentational issues, FinVids looks like a much better source than the current list of links, but it does not provide the kind of user experience a site linked from Wikipedia should. If you have a connection with the site, I can suggest changes to your design that would make it more appropriate for inclusion (however, in that case, it would be inappropriate for you to add links to the site yourself). Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 06:18, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that

Let's just let it slide, eh :) Αlex (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(In regards to accidentally blanking a redirect)

Sure, sure. No punishment for honest mistakes around here. :) ~~I'll delete that warning template from your talk page and let you get back to your editing.~~ I didn't warn you after all. So. Happy editing, then! Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 19:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You sign your posts Tuvoc. Awesome.