Jump to content

User talk:Acalamari

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sidnext2none (talk | contribs) at 21:24, 23 October 2013 (→‎Taumas Aura). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello Wikipedians and people who are not-yet Wikipedians.

This is my user talk page. You can contact me here. If you are a registered user who wishes to send an E-mail to me, please feel free to use the "E-mail this user" feature in the toolbox on the left side of this page. I also encourage everyone to read the contents of my talk page, and my archives, as well. Acalamari 21:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notice: if you post a message on my talk page and do not receive a response on yours, please be aware that I will have responded here, although I will respond on yours if that is more suitable for you; however, I have learned that it is best to keep a discussion in the same place in order to avoid confusion. I would also appreciate the talkback template and its variants not being used here...if I post to your page, rest assured that I will be looking out for a response there. Other than that, feel free to post!
Archive
Archives
  1. Acalamari archive A
  2. Acalamari archive B
  3. Acalamari archive C
  4. Acalamari archive D
  5. Acalamari archive E
  6. Acalamari archive F
  7. Acalamari archive G
  8. Acalamari archive H
  9. Acalamari archive I
  10. Acalamari archive J
  11. Acalamari archive K
  12. Acalamari archive L
  13. Acalamari archive M
  14. Acalamari archive N
  15. Acalamari archive O
  16. Acalamari archive P
  17. Acalamari archive Q
  18. Acalamari archive R
  19. Acalamari archive S
  20. Acalamari archive T
  21. Acalamari archive U
  22. Acalamari archive V
  23. Acalamari archive W
  24. Acalamari archive X
  25. Acalamari archive Y
  26. Acalamari archive Z
  27. Acalamari archive 027
  28. Acalamari archive 028
  29. Acalamari archive 029
  30. Acalamari archive 030
  31. Acalamari archive 031
  32. Acalamari archive 032
  33. Acalamari archive 033
  34. Acalamari archive 034
  35. Acalamari archive 035
  36. Acalamari archive 036
  37. Acalamari archive 037
  38. Acalamari archive 038
  39. Acalamari archive 039
  40. Acalamari archive 040
  41. Acalamari archive 041
  42. Acalamari archive 042
  43. Acalamari archive 043
  44. Acalamari archive 044

Gary Barlow - genre

Hi, sorry for the interrupt. Can you revert the genre for Gary Barlow page? Yids2010 was not allow other users to revert any genre. According to AllMusic, genre says pop/rock and classical but article says pop vocalist. As for soft rock is a music style and was not supported by citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.176.143 (talk) 05:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would be better if you raised this either on their talk page or the article's talk page; it would be inappropriate for me to take a side in a content dispute. Best. Acalamari 08:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aguilera - fighter

Stop rollback. Genre confirmed by a source — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.205.10.175 (talk) 12:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not use rollback to revert your edits. I won't revert you again, but I will note that the article says "'Fighter' is a pop song which incorporates elements from R&B, rock, arena rock and rock n roll." It says that it's a pop song; incorporating some elements from other genres does not automatically put the song in those other genres. Acalamari 14:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office Mojo sucks

Explanation of problems with box office gross figures at The_Mortal_Instruments:_City_of_Bones. Short version: Box Office Mojo updates some figures without updating subtotals.

Added a warning to page source and explanation on Talk page. Talk:The_Mortal_Instruments:_City_of_Bones#Box_Office_Mojo_sucks Article lock may no longer be necessary. No reply necessary. -- 109.76.241.16 (talk) 13:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A reply might not be necessary but I'll have a look at what you've said over there and will respond. Acalamari 14:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism in Lurs and Luristan page

Hi Acalamari "HistoryofIran" user vandalism in Lurs and Luristan page. He remove All Historical images and "Lur people of iran" map no valid reason. I ask you to stop doing this "HistoryofIran" user.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoryofIran

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorestan_Province

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lurs

Thank youSetenlyacc (talk) 05:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering taking both of them to ANI. The articles they are edit-warring on are a mess. However, I discovered that Setenlyacc ignored my warnings about copyvio and, as I did earlier with HistoryofIran, I have blocked him indefinitely which means he is blocked until we can be sure he understands our copyvio policy and can edit it without breaking it. Dougweller (talk) 07:09, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for handling this, Dougweller. Acalamari 17:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback rights given to Frze

Can you please explain to me your reasons for allowing Frze to rollback my warning to him to not conduct his edit-waring argument in the article The Bill on the actual article page. I told him that the correct place to do this was on the talk page. What he did defaced the article with large amounts of BOLD RED TYPE in the very first sentence of the introduction. I hasten to add that what he was arguing about was another editors changing of 'is' to 'was' a 'police procedural' TV series. I had no argument with his rationale (in fact I wholeheartedly agreed with the context ) but objected to him arguing on the actual article page. Please explain. The Dart (talk) 20:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I granted Frze rollback rights because they requested them here; in my review of their request, I did not find anything to warrant denying their request, although it is possible that I could have been wrong. Could you provide diffs of any misuse of rollback or other edits you think should warrant rollback being revoked from them, please? Thanks. Acalamari 21:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No I can't, because I removed the offending text in The Bill article at the time that I warned him because it was the simplest thing to do. But I do suggest you drop by his talk page where he is right now having a similar dispute with Montanabw. It may be better all round if non-English speaking editors stuck to editing articles in their own native tongue. The Dart (talk) 21:30, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Acalamari: I noticed this --> error and fixed it by editing an old revision of this page, as edited by Nikkimaria at 05:51, 15 September 2013. That is all. User:The Dart wrote me a notice, which I didn't answer, because I have a lot to do. He is now fighting me. Why do he do this? I don't know. He is stalking/hounding me! I only fixed this Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Steen" is not used in the content. --Frze > talk 21:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am not stalking him. I just wondered why he was allowed to remove my warning to him when another editor such as QwertyBinary reprimanded me for removing something from my own talk page. I just thought it was a double standard, that's all.The Dart (talk) 22:01, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have to log out for the night (will be going to bed soon) and will look more into this tomorrow, if that's okay. In the meantime, I would like to clarify that, while it's not recommended, you are both free to remove messages from your respective talk pages if you so desire; neither of you should be blocked for removing messages from your talks. While I'm saying this without knowing the context, The Dart, you should not have been warned or reverted on your own talk for removing messages from it. Acalamari 22:12, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, now I know where I stand, I was threatened with blocking by QwertyBinary. Over and out. The Dart (talk) 22:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Before I go for now, the relevant link for both of you is Wikipedia:User_talk_page#User_talk_pages, which should clarify the user talk issue for you. Acalamari 22:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Dart wrote wrong bad things about me on my talk page as an IP: This is Vandalism. You should warn him, not me. Thanks and God Night. --Frze > talk 22:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All that I wrote about Frze was related to his vandalism of The Bill article, which produced two glaringly bold errors which were highlighted in red text. I reverted his vandalism and told another editor, Montanabw, about it as she was having the same problem with him on an article, Homer Davenport, that she was making a major contribution to. It is obvious to me that he hasn't got any more than a rudimentary comprehension of English.The Dart (talk) 12:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I did not make any vandalism, and there are no bold errors highlighted in red text. See: revision of this page, as edited by Nikkimaria and compare with the --> error by 92.20.145.188, which I fixed. Please: Show me bold red text, Mr. Dart. Homer Davenport is completely another total different problem, which should not interest you. --Frze > talk 16:46, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, The Dart, when someone commits vandalism, their intent is to deliberately and maliciously degrade the quality of the encyclopedia; I don't think that Frze's edits constitute malicious intent. I also don't think that Frze's edits (the ones I've reviewed, anyway) to either The Bill or Homer Davenport warrant blocking them or revoking their rollback rights; that is why I asked for specific diffs, as I haven't found any edits were Frze introduced an error/red text into the The Bill article. However, Frze, after looking through some of your rollbacks, I am concerned. Could you explain to me how any of the following edits were vandalism? Some look more like good-faith accidents than vandalism and should have been reverted with a proper explanation: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] In addition, while I said removing messages from your talk page is fine, using rollback to do so is a misuse of the rollback tool.
I'd also like to assure both of you, The Dart and Frze, that I have not taken anyone's side and am listening to what both of you are saying. Best. Acalamari 17:33, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I accept that what Frze did to The Bill may have been a good faith error. I can no longer actually find it in the form (red text) that I found it in before I deleted it, but he was arguing the point on the actual article page instead of the talk page. Anyway I am sure you would like to get on with life, as would I. Thanks Acalamari, goodnight.The Dart (talk) 17:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as how Dart brought this to my attention, I'll just note for the record (don't need any action at this time, just an FYI only, FWIW) that Frze commented out a source I inserted in the Homer Davenport article that WAS being used for inline footnotes, but there were typos in the formatting (I left out some quotation marks) that created the appearance of a source that was not used in the article body text. When I undid his changes, with a snippy remark, I admit, he reverted me with a lecture about proper formatting. Then I got really snippy with Frze about it because it made more work for me to clean up - and because Wehwalt and I are prepping the piece for GA, and it's lot of work, I was particularly short-fused about a drive-by edit like that and took it to Frze's talk. But he has backed down, and appears to be exhibiting good will, so as far as I am concerned, that issue is settled, but if you're wondering, that's what happened. Some of this may well be related to a language issue, but I cannot say for sure. Not a big deal at this point, though I wish he would have dropped the stick after the first revert. Montanabw(talk) 18:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@The Dart: You can't find any bold red text or syntax-errors in my edit on The Bill, because they never had been there. I fixed the -->-problem, that's all. You are right, the correct place for the argument is in the talk page, not in the text of the actual article. Cheers! (I prefer a good cold Pilsner) --Frze > talk 19:39, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Montanabw: We both are working to wikipedia to make it better - you as profi in your text editions, and me as little "Wiki Janitor". What I do is clearing up a lot (thousands) of petty minor ref-errors of other editors, pages with missing references list or incorrect ref-formating. I saw only Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Steen" is not used in the content, twice, as the system said to me - and you wrote the contrary, it is used. Sorry, but I believed: Who is wrong , the system or you. So I hope you can understand me now. I apologise for my angry behavior. I feel like you: I wish I would have dropped the stick after the first revert. (And not to answer User:The Dart wrong unqualified chatter on my talk page.) Wish you all the best. Thanks, good night and good luck. --Frze > talk 19:39, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Acalamari: Thanks for mediation of the dispute cases. You are right, I should be more carefully in my edit work and have to leave with explanation, if they seem rather like good-faith accidents than vandalism. You said removing messages from my talk page is permitted. My opinion is anyway how: manually, with the button <undo> or using rollback function - to do so is a not misuse of the rollback tool, just easier and faster. So I wish you all the best, thanks, good night and good luck. --Frze > talk 19:39, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Montanabw, thanks for your input; I appreciate you giving me your side of the dispute and for considering the matter settled. Frze, I accept your response and appreciate you listening to the concerns raised here; I hope that future interactions with everyone here will be positive. I do strongly advise against using rollback to remove messages from your talk page, though: I wouldn't remove anyone's rollback rights for it (another admin might, so be aware of that), but it is impolite to remove a message in that manner (unless, of course, you're reverting vandalism). The Dart, I'd just like to note your post about wanting to move on; I hope Frze's response provides you with adequate resolution. If there's anything else anyone needs, please do let me know; I hope I was helpful! :) Best. Acalamari 20:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thanks a lot for your mediation work in our dispute cases. You are on my list: If I would have any more questions I'll contact you. Cheers! Here are my greetings: a good cold Pilsner :) Frze > talk 21:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Woody's Chicago Style

Hello Acalamari - Please take a look at Woody's Chicago Style, the useless link and compare with revision of this page, as edited by GoingBatty at 2 August 2012. The contributions of User:Norman1938 and his photos seem to me as strong vandalism. Please revert his edits and warn or block him. BW --Frze > talk 08:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I thought it was vandalism at first but in the picture File:Roof_of_Office.jpg "Woody's Hot Dogs" is on a sign on the building. There was an excess of images in the article before you removed them all, but that's doesn't mean the user was intentionally trying to degrade the quality of the page. It would be worth posting to Norman1938's talk page to ask them about all the images. Acalamari 14:36, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hello Acalamari. I am curious about your recent log action at wp:uaa. I suspect the "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material" removed from the summary closely resembles the offensive material inside the {{user-uaa|1=Offensive name}} template which remains in the history? This preview as well. If so; perhaps your mop will prove itself handy. Cheers.—John Cline (talk) 15:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John Cline! It looks as though DragonflySixtyseven dealt with this. :) You're right: the edits themselves should have been hidden, too, but my priority was to hide the edit summary, as that ugliness was more prominent on the surface. Best. Acalamari 22:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback right

Would you please provide me with rollback right so that i can revert vandalism easily. I have applied for the right in Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback. But no one responding to my request. If i have rollback right i would fight vandalism from my cell phone more easily where undoing a large edit like this is not possible for me. - Rahat | Message 17:24, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ctg4Rahat, while I agree that that particular edit was indeed vandalism, I found very few instances of vandal-fighting in your recent edits. Could you provide me with some diffs, please? Thanks. Acalamari 17:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some of the revert i made

[10] [11]

Rahat | Message 18:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You have listed some good vandalism reverts; however, there are four that I think wouldn't have been appropriate to use rollback to revert. [15][16][17][18] don't look like vandalism to me (POV-pushing, perhaps? Even that should be given a reason for removal), and are better off being reverted with a proper explanation rather than rollback. If you can assure me that you'd use rollback to revert obvious vandalism then I'd be happy to grant you the tool, but those four reverts do concern me. Acalamari 22:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know where to use rollback (obvious vandalism like slang, nonsense word, personal comment, blanking) and where to not (POV, unexplained removal, advert). See some of my last contributions.

I have Rollback right on bn wiki. - Rahat | Message 08:12, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happier with those recent reverts. Rollback granted. Acalamari 16:55, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Acalamari Thank you very much...Rahat | Message 17:04, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Normandy landings

Hello Acalamari and trust you are well? Could I please draw your attention to user 195.87.24.194 editing record, with particular reference to the Normandy landings article. I and other editors have repeatedly warned them about their disruptive actions. I will also declare a personal interest; in that my own father lost his life in this campaign. With best wishes, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as though the article has had some vandalism recently; I've semi-protected it for two weeks. Acalamari 11:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 12:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer request for my other account

Hi Acalamari, can you grant reviewer rights to my alternative account, Jianhui68? I think I will need that right while patrolling for vandalism in case any pending changes revision pop out of Special:RecentChanges. I normally use that account in school reverting vandalism. Thanks. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Acalamari 10:14, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TE right

Thank you. Simply south...... cooking letters for just 7 years 22:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! :) Acalamari 22:54, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help regarding Samsung Galaxy Note 3 edits by User:Ausgoth

Hi I need your help in the article Samsung Galaxy Note 3, regarding a User:Ausgoth as he does not seem to stop on insisting his edits which was reverted back due to either being redundant and/or erroneous. He was blocked before for breaching the 3RR, several warnings on his talk page was already given, yet he still insists on editing without getting the consensus of majority of the editors via the article's talk page which already results to its disruption. In line of this may we ask for your help as we need to do something about this user more than warnings already due to him not to heeding to the warnings given to him and hoping that it would be settled once and for all, Thanks! JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 11:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've fully protected the page and have started a discussion at Talk:Samsung Galaxy Note 3#Edit war. I could issue blocks but I think it would be wiser for those involved to discuss. Acalamari 11:44, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the page protection but may I warn you that User:Ausgoth does not engage in talk pages and just waits for the block or protection to expire and thus repeats all his actions again. So in case he does this all over again, what could be done? Thanks! JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 11:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with Ausgoth's overall editing patterns and decided to try to handle the dispute this way. If, as you've said, Ausgoth ignores the discussion and waits for the protection to expire, unfortunately, a block would be entirely justified - possibly an indefinite block if the behavior persists after that. Some admins would probably say that a block is already justified but I'm not usually so quick to block in cases like this. Acalamari 11:51, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then i'll wait till a consensus is made regarding the article, again thanks! JeromesandilanicoJSD (talk) 12:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your understanding. :) I've also informed Ausgoth that resuming the edit war once the protection has expired will result in a block. Acalamari 12:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day

Happy First Edit Day, Acalamari, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Zach Vega (talk to me) 17:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Do What U Want"

Thanks for the "thanks"! Right now, and assistance with expanding the article would be much appreciated, especially since it is currently listed at AfD. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, you deserved it...you actually added a link rather than a useless non-link! :D Yes, I saw the AfD and have been debating about what to post there; you've done a good job with Venus (Lady Gaga song) and you're doing the same in building this article. Acalamari 18:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weymouth, Dorset

Hello Acalamari, Could I please ask for your advice on the edits over the last two days on the Weymouth, Dorset article? I have reverted edits from two IP addresses, asking them both(?) to supply reliable sources - the info could well be correct. I have also left notes on the two Talk page(s), which have been ignored and the unsourced edits have been reinstated without comment. I have no intention of starting a "edit war", but feel that the two(?) editors should, at least explain their actions. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can remove the unsourced content, regardless of its authenticity; however, if you feel that the information the IP editors are adding could be correct, it might be a good idea to have a look for a source rather than remove anything. That being said, what they're adding seems fairly trivial anyway, but a search for a source couldn't hurt and if you can't verify it, remove it. It doesn't look block or protect-worthy at this time but feel free to keep me updated. Best. Acalamari 20:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice. I will ask them(?) to provide a source and see what happens. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's the same person. I would advise you to have a short search for a source, as you already have asked them through warnings and it's been ignored. Acalamari 20:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obama

Hello! I want to know why did you revert my edit [19]? There is strong evidence he practised islam as a young boy. [20]. I know he is now a Christian, so "former muslim" category is just fine. Stilgar27 (talk) 12:58, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The first point on Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ will explain why I reverted your edit, as well as the fact that the category has to be supported by the content of the article rather than the other way around. You could try bringing this to Talk:Barack Obama but I doubt anyone would be convinced to add it. In addition, any article that disparagingly refers to President Obama as "Barry" is unlikely to be a neutral or reliable source. Acalamari 17:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taumas Aura

Vandalism ? Fake article ? Please take a look at this page. What's to do with such editors Sidnext2none? Thanks and Good night. --Frze > talk 20:51, 23 October 2013 (UTC) >> please ping me > V[reply]

@Frze: The editor blanked most of the content after you tagged the page. I think that this satisfies WP:CSD#G7; I've deleted it. No further action needs to be taken at this time unless they create it again. Acalamari 20:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am new to wikipedia. I want to contribute, so it was my genuine intention with the idea of creating web pages for all the researchers in my University. To make my task easier, I copied the content from Richard StallMan's page and was editing it. About the photo - I didnt know that we can not take photo from our University. Guidelines Neede User: Sidnext2none: Sidnext2none Sidnext2none (talk) 21:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Acalamari&oldid=578459944"