User talk:Jack Greenmaven

GOCE 2012 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2012 Annual Report The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Canberra meetup invitation: January 2013

Hi there! You are cordially invited to attend a meetup being held on Wednesday 9 January 2013. Yes, that is tomorrow. Sorry about the short notice.

Details an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Canberra/January 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 09:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in ACT)

Paolo Poli

Hi Jack, how are you? Me very fine, this is my last article for January (yeeeeaaahhhh :-) because I'll travel next Thursday in France for holyday.

Please, can you read for me? It's a great theatre actor, I like him very much for his avant-gard and for his sweetnes. Thanks again for your help.

Rex Momo (talk) 14:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-drive newsletter, January 2013

Guild of Copy Editors January 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter We are halfway through our January backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 01:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

FTD is no longer published

Your edit: 03:12, 4 January 2013‎ Jack Greenmaven (talk | contribs)‎ . . (9,619 bytes) (+201)‎ . . (Reverted good faith edit(s) by 85.216.189.230 using STiki) at List of newspapers in Germany‎:

The Financial Times Deutschland was a German language financial newspaper based in Hamburg, Germany, published by (...) → It ceased publication on 7 December 2012.

So, really sorry for FTD, but why should it still be in the list? --Schwab7000 (talk) 14:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

your edits are fine with me. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 08:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Port-du-Salut Abbey

Hi Jack, how are you?

Please, I asl 5-6 minutes of your precious time to read this page I justa made. I love this place!

Sorry, my English is very poor... thank a lot!

Rex Momo (talk) 14:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Moral diplomacy

Hello Jack Greenmaven. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Moral diplomacy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 09:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE barnstar

		The Minor Barnstar
		Thanks for copyediting a total of 2,492 words in the GOCE January backlog-elimination drive. See you in the March drive and all the best, Miniapolis 16:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Sons of Merciful Love

Hi Jack, how are you? Please, do you have some minutes to read this new page I just made? Your help is so precious to improve my poor English!

Thanks a lot!

Rex Momo (talk) 17:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

JM

Your edits in relation to JM are inappropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.194.147 (talk) 06:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE February 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors February 2013 events newsletter We are preparing to start our February requests blitz and March backlog elimination drive. The February 2013 newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the February blitz and March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Canberra meetup invitation: February 2013

Hi there! You are cordially invited to attend a meetup being held on Sunday 24 February 2013. Sorry about the short notice.

Details and attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Canberra/February 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 08:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in ACT)

GOCE news: February 2013

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2013 wrap-up Participation: Out of 19 people who signed up for this blitz, 9 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the six-day blitz, we removed over twenty articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, BDD and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join Wikiproject Conflict Resolution

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conflict Resolution.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-March 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter We are halfway through our March backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Ilario Antoniazzi

Hi Jack, how are you? it's a long time we don't correspond. I made this new page, and I ask your help to see please if I made all correct. Please, when you'll have 5 minutes...

I thank yopu a lot for your help

Rex Momo (talk) 17:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Rex, I am not editing at present. Sorry. Greenmaven (talk) 21:21, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

GOCE April 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our March backlog elimination drive. The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the April blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:09, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Shaolin

Hi Jack, how are you? Please, I ask your precious help (you'll need 5-7 minutes only) to correct my wiki-mistakes. He is a great Brazilian humorist.

Thanks a lot for your help

Rex Momo (talk) 10:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

GOCE April 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors April 2013 events newsletter We finished the April blitz and are preparing to start our May backlog elimination drive. The April 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the May drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Signore delle cime

Hi Jack Greenmaven, how are you? I made this new page, and I ask you, please, 5 minutes of your precious time to read, and correct my mistakes. I'm sure you'll find, because my English is very poor! Can you help me?

I thank you very much, have a nice week end

Rex Momo (talk) 22:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Carnival of Limoux

Hi Jack, how are you?

I just made this page. As you know my English isn't so good... :-) Please, I ask you to correct my mistakes. Thanks a lot!

Rex Momo (talk) 08:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to look at edits on IQ reference chart

I see the article IQ reference chart has been tagged for expert review since October 2012. As part of a process of drafting a revision of that article in my user sandbox, I am contacting all Wikipedians who have edited that article since early 2009 for whom I can find a user talk page.

I have read all the diffs of all the edits committed to the article since the beginning of 2009 (since before I started editing Wikipedia). I see the great majority of edits over that span have been vandalism (often by I.P. editors, presumably teenagers, inserting the names of their classmates in charts of IQ classifications) and reversions of vandalism (sometimes automatically by ClueBot). Just a few editors have referred to and cited published reliable sources on the topic of IQ classification. It is dismaying to see that the number of reliable sources cited in the article has actually declined over the last few years. To help the process of finding reliable sources for articles on psychology and related topics, I have been compiling a source list on intelligence since I became a Wikipedian in 2010, and I invite you to make use of those sources as you revise articles on Wikipedia and to suggest further sources for the source on the talk pages of the source list and its subpages. Because the IQ reference chart article has been tagged as needing expert attention for more than half a year, I have opened discussion on the article's talk page about how to fix the article, and I welcome you to join the discussion. The draft I have in my user sandbox shows my current thinking about a reader-friendly, well sourced way to update and improve the article. I invite your comments and especially your suggestions of reliable sources as the updating process proceeds. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 21:01, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I have looked at your sandbox. I am not knowledgable about the topic, but you seem to have created a well structured article. My only edits were to revert vandalism. I do not expect to edit it or participate in discussions. Thanks for the invitation. I wish you well. --Greenmaven (talk) 08:17, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

GOCE May drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors May 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our May backlog elimination drive. The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the June blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE June/July 2013 events

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our June blitz and are about to commence our July backlog elimination drive. The June/July 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the July drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:GOCE invitation

Hi there. I wanted to drop you a note to see if you'd be interested in joining the Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive. In the past, you've been a huge contributor to our efforts, but I haven't seen you in the most recent drives. We've made lots of progress on the backlog, but we're getting a bit stalled out lately. We need more help to keep pushing down the number of articles that still need copy editing. The current drive is already halfway over! Please consider joining it and chipping in a few articles. Thanks for reading this, and I hope to see you there. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:40, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry! I doubt whether I can contribute this time around. I am not editing much at the moment. A recent change to my homepage explains it (top left box) --Greenmaven (talk) 13:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 news report

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 30 people who have signed up for this drive so far, 18 have participated. If you have signed up for the drive but have not yet participated, it isn't too late. If you haven't signed up for the drive, sign up now! Progress report: Thus far we have reduced the number of May/June 2012 articles to just 124 articles, so we're on the right track. Unfortunately, for the first time in GOCE history, the number of articles in the backlog has actually gone up during this drive. While all participants are currently doing a fine job, we just don't have as many of them as we have had in the past. We have over 500 editors on our mailing list, but only 18 editors who have done a copy edit for the drive. If you're receiving this newsletter, it's because you have an interest in copy editing. Join the drive! Even if you only copy edit one article, it helps. Imagine how much progress we could make if everyone chipped in just one article. – Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

New Article

Hi there. I am a new user and was looking for someone to review my work in my sandbox. I hope it is okay. Will you take a look? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Igoody/sandbox 58.179.36.91 (talk) 20:47, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I have looked at your article and will discuss it on your Talk Page. BTW remember to sign all posts (see above), here is my signature: --Greenmaven (talk) 23:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

East Africa

Hello! I was born in Uganda and grew up there. For the past 31 years I have resided in the United States. I return to East Africa every year since 2010. I have visited, albeit briefly, all the neighboring countries except South Sudan and perhaps Burundi. The limiting factor for me in both countries is the still dicey security situation. The information that I have about South Sudan is what I read on Wikipedia, not withstanding the fact that I have written some of the articles myself. Fsmatovu (talk) 21:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

• • Any of the media outlets belonging to the Nation Media Group are considered reliable. These include (a) Daily Nation (b) Business Daily (c) Daily Nation (c) Daily Monitor and The East African. See: http://www.nationmedia.com/ Fsmatovu (talk) 19:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - I will check out your link. --Greenmaven (talk) 20:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 copy edit drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our July backlog elimination drive. The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the August blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz wrap-up and September 2013 drive invitation

Guild of Copy Editors August Blitz wrap-up Participation: Out of sixteen people who signed up for this blitz, nine copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 26 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the September drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest and Torchiest, Baffle gab1978 and Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the September drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 03:01, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Maurizio Ferrini

Hi, dearest Jack, how are you?

I made this page about an Italian actor that I like too much, and I ask you 5 minutes of your time to correct my mistakes, please.

Thanks a lot for your help!

Rei Momo (talk) 14:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

GOCE September 2013 drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors September 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The September 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the October blitz! – Your project coordinators: Torchiest and Torchiest, Baffle gab1978 and Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor and The Utahraptor. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz wrap-up; join us for the November drive

Guild of Copy Editors October Blitz wrap-up Participation: Out of eleven people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we copy edited 42 articles from WikiProject Film's backlog, reducing it by a net of 34 articles. Hope to see you at the November drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest and Torchiest, Baffle gab1978 and Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the November drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:50, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Explanation for edit

Hey I'm GreekHistorian! I appreciate your career and you were just doing your job. I was just doing mine (which is deleting antiquated and irrational information on Wikipedia). About the Battle of Crete, I wasn't attempting some experiment, I was deleting what I believe was a one sided argument. Whoever wrote this failed to present the other side of the argument or state that it wasn't solved yet. Here is the error. He believes that that the 22, June, 1941 (launch date of Operation Barbarossa)was scheduled several weeks before. He fails to explain that the original date was 15, May, 1941. A campaign of such date could have been postponed cause of the Battle of Crete or other factors. I believe that would be all I've got to mention about the article for now.

If you like to hear a more reasonable argument see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Marita#Impact_on_Operation_Barbarossa.

I apologize if there is anything infantine in this complaint (I'm only a High school student). I really appreciate that you took your time reading this. I'd would appreciate if you share advise on how to edit Wikipedia articles. If you found anything contradicting my complaint please let me know.

Signed

GreekHistorian (talk) 10:54, 6 November 2013 (UTC)Greek HistorianGreekHistorian (talk) 10:54, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the paragraph which you have now removed twice. It was supported by three references. By removing it you are editing according to you personal point of view, which is not allowable in Wikipedia. See WP:NPOV. I will leave a message on your talk page about learning how to edit. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 04:03, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

MPS revision

Hey! I'm not too clear about why my addition to the mucopolysaccharidosis article was revoked, as it was mostly meant to be a better phrasing of the previous work, which doesn't make much sense as it is now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.205.204.195 (talk) 20:20, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

The sentence you added was fairly vague and not supported by any evidence. --Greenmaven (talk) 04:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

a correction

I made a correction to one of the descriptions under one of mark levin's books. The current description under his book 'the liberty amendments' states that mark calls for an overhaul to the constitution. This is false. He is very specific that he calls for no such thing. So when I corrected it and made it accurate greenmaven said he returned it to how it was because he thought it was 'better' the way it was. So my question is-why would it be better as an inaccurate description? It is not. That makes no sense. The correction I made paraphrased levin's own words to a T. Obviously the correction i made makes the description better. How can it possibly be better being wrong? Please change it back to my description. It is an insult to Levin and myself to say it was 'better' being inaccurate and falseTaxi502 (talk) 11:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I stand by my reversion of your correction of Mark Levin. The phrases "breathing life into the constitution" and "to combat an overreaching federal government" indicate a non-neutral point of view (WP:NPOV). Also, none of what you wrote was substantiated by a reference, and can therefore be removed without further justification. BTW your next edit, which was reverted by ClueBot, was something that belonged on my talk page or the article talk page, not in the body of the article. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 23:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Changes to a page

Hello! I noticed you reverted some changes a person I know made to the Oklahoma Baptist University page. We're concerned about the entire Controversies section, as it appears to contain parts that are either pure opinion and soapboxing (which only use this individual's blog as references), one-sided arguments that have few or no citations, or, in some cases, outright lies. A Controversies section in and of itself also appears negative. Such a section does not follow the general outline other university pages in this area, and, as an example, the page for University of California, Davis has its pepper spray incident listed under History, and not under a separate Controversies section. Do you have any suggestions on how to proceed editing this section to remove the false information? Typogrammer (talk) 03:36, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Having a controversies section seems to invite opinionated and non neutral editing. I recommend putting anything verifiable into a History section and deleting unverifiable material. Then delete the controversies section header. My apologies if I disrupted your attempts to edit out poor material in good faith. --Greenmaven (talk) 04:06, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to revert my edits to Oklahoma Baptist University. I will stay out of it. A further suggestion: try using the article talk pages to resolve differences of opinion rather than making contentious changes. I hope this is helpful. --Greenmaven (talk) 04:15, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. I now see that the article's talk page is rather heated over this one section. I will start with the talk page to get the ball rolling on this. Would using WP:TM be a good option here? Typogrammer (talk) 05:39, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

No, I would not use template messages. Write in your own words. State what changes you plan to make, and why. If there is no immediate opposition, proceed to edit. Otherwise, argue your case, rather than risk an edit war. You may find that, by now, other editors have gone cold on the matter. Remember anyone can remove material for which there is no reputable source. I would guess that for much of the controversy there are no published sources. In the end, an article will only become stable when a consensus has been reached. Good luck! --Greenmaven (talk) 06:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Why do you have to undo my minor changes for The Little Mermaid?

I'm not upset. I just would like an more reasonable explanation. I would be fine with you undoing my changes, if there's more a reason to it.

Spencer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer Maverick (talk • contribs) 07:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

You added unnecessary blank lines. You used the word 'overwhelmingly' about the reviews. This amounts to a strong expression of personal opinion, which violates WP:NPOV and WP:PEACOCK --Greenmaven (talk) 08:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

RE:

So nothing negative can be put on a page? Seems pretty unfair. If people want to know about something or someone they should get the whole story, not just the positive things. Or else people will only learn half of what should be known. You must be a lowely Mobage employee yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mobageisevil (talk • contribs) 10:23, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

sEEMS FAIR TO ME SINCE iSRAEL IS A nUCLEAR STATE BASED ON APARTHEID — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.117.77 (talk) 04:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Made in chelsea

actually my edit was constructive cos it was factual. what about the other so called "unconstructive" edits on that page, such as "crying" as louise's description and "absolute piece" for spencer? why did you just focus on mine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.20.38.105 (talk) 05:30, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Check the article history and you will find I reverted another editor's work, after yours. The reason why I have not gone right through the article removing other things, is that I am using an automated process, which just presents me with recent edits of one person. If you think there are comments that should be removed, then do so, but carefully and respectfully. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 05:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

about ps

you said what you did, but for the reason, you said "because I believe the article was better before you made that change." Are you able to say something more specific? And what is the meaning of PS in "PS I love you"? I do not really mind you undo it (or delete it), but can you solve the problem at the same time? Enjoy doing the undoing, enjoy doing the deletion. Jackzhp (talk) 07:05, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

In that phrase PS means 'postscript'. It is listed further down in the article. --Greenmaven (talk) 08:30, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

You rejected one word....really, Jack?

My addition of one word, "modelesque" accurately describes the dolls. It's only one word. What could it hurt? You say it doesn't add anything, but it certainly takes nothing away from the article. I think you take your job too seriously.

Statick1 (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)Statick1

Taking the job seriously is what makes a good encyclopedia. At first I removed 'modalesque' because I thought the word did not exist. Since then I have discovered that it does. I still think it is too WP:COLLOQUIAL for an encyclopedia. However, I will not revert it again, if you think it is appropriate. --Greenmaven (talk) 18:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

My edit in "Nagging"

What I contributed may not have been necessarily "constructive," but that doesn't make it any less true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.184.184.124 (talk) 23:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!

		The Silver STiki Barnstar of Merit
		Congratulations, Jack Greenmaven! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 10,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and  Tentinator  06:28, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Economy of Bulgaria

Please, read the edit I've reverted. It's possible vandalism from unregistered user. Regards, gogo3o 06:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I have replied on your Talk Page. Being an unregistered user does not necessarily mean their edits are done in bad faith or without due care. Regards. --Greenmaven (talk) 08:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I still think that it cannot stay in the format added by the unregistred user. Looks like the text was copy-pasted from an economy report. Also it is unreferenced. Regards, gogo3o 09:23, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

If you are sure that it is a copyright violation, you can certainly remove it. Please leave an edit summary that explains the reason (WP:CV). Thanks. --Greenmaven (talk) 10:07, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I removed it, because it was massive duplication of the existing article. Why on earth would you reinsert that? bobrayner (talk) 23:09, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Frankhu2016

The statement you left for Frankhu2016, "Please do not edit this article further: it is a specialist article best left to experts in the field." sounds like you're telling him not to edit the article at all, rather than just to not make the types of edits he was making, which goes against WP:OWN. Can you clarify what you meant for him? Thanks, Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:26, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

No I am not going to make any further clarification to him. Frankhu2016 made his first edits, as I recall, on Supercomputing, by editing its lead paragraph in a very amateurish way. After I reverted this edit he attempted to add the same material a second and third time. I thought I asked him not to keep doing that in a fair and reasonable manner. I certainly do not think I WP:OWN the article, but I am a retired computer programmer and am in a good position to make a judgement call on Supercomputing. Frankhu2016 clearly needs to read up on the guidelines to editing WP. He did not even know how to post an edit on my talk page in the normal fashion, which I also helped him out on. Given his inexperience as a WP editor, I do think he would be better gaining more experience editing something less technical than Supercomputing. I am sure you are trying to be constructive, and I hope this clarifies my actions to you. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Ptolemaic Kingdom

Responding to your post on my talk page, I don't know whether the edit I made was "constructive"; it was made for the sake of consistency. Most "History of ..." pages that redirect to a more general article redirect to a specific "History" section within that article (assuming such a section exists). I added the specific "History" section to the "History of Ptolemaic Egypt" redirect page both because that's how it's usually done and because all other "History of ..." pages redirecting to "Ptolemaic Kingdom" (which are "History of ptolemaic egypt" and "History of Greek Egypt") already redirect to "Ptolemaic Kingdom#History". I'm not sure whether I'm supposed to await a response from you before making my edit again or not; if you haven't responded to this within a full day, I'll assume that means you're ok with my making the same edit again. Jdaloner (talk) 23:09, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

My apologies. My mistake. I have undone my edit and the article is now as you left it. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 23:17, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Please notice ip 111.243.0.198 , 114.39.7.129

Hi ,Jack Greenmaven , ip user 111.243.0.198 and ip 114.39.7.129 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/111.243.0.198 , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/114.39.7.129, Vandalism a lot of articles , please stop these ip user , thank youMBINISIDLERS (talk) 08:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I cannot discriminate between good and bad edits because these are all about Taiwan and China about which I have little knowledge. Sorry. --Greenmaven (talk) 11:10, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Jack Greenmaven. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by ColinFine (talk) 11:37, 23 November 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Meal

Please could you explain the reason for your revert? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.204.61 (talk) 22:32, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I thought the existing phrase "and includes specific, prepared food" already said what was needed, and that the words you added were repetitive and redundant. I see you have restored your own wording and added two references, which is fine, and I will leave it at that. The problem was that your wording was unnecessary, not that it was inaccurate or needed to be supported by references. Thanks. --Greenmaven (talk) 00:32, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

The words I added are neither repetitive nor redundant - they are necessary. Imagine the following definition, where the word food has been replaced with music: A meal is an eating occasion that takes place at a certain time and includes specific, prepared music . Given your logic, a specific, prepared music also can be understood as a meal. You can say: music is not eatable, but neither is an occasion. BTW I am a programmer too, and also remember Fortran and punched cards :-) Regards. 85.193.204.61 (talk) 18:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Possibly the wording could still be improved by emphasising that a meal can refer both to the occasion and the food that is eaten. I suggest the latter be expressed in a separate sentence. Regards. --Greenmaven (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, but conjunction "or" by its very nature refers equally to both subjects, doesn't it? Besides - even in a very long and comprehensive article - concise style of the first sentence is rather desirable in any encyclopedia. Look here. 85.193.204.61 (talk) 00:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Singh Saab The Great

Changes made in Singh Saab The Great page were relevant as the boxofficeindia.com is nt updatd. it stills shows opening day record with ek tha tiger but it is with chennai express so collections of taran adarsh(bolywood hungama) and koimoi.com are good and can be trusted. u can check with link of koimoi on the page about collections of 1st day — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skanwar5 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

That article has now been fixed up by someone to restore 'Koi Moi' to the page. Please sign your posts and provide a link to the article being discussed in future. See how I have done it above. Thanks. --Greenmaven (talk) 05:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

List of Hitch knots

Why were my changes reverted? I'm working to expand the descriptions. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 19:43, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

You appeared to be removing sourced material. Apologies. I am using an anti-vandalism tool which presents articles to me in a more or less random sequence. I accept that you are editing in good faith. --Greenmaven (talk) 20:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you for getting back to me so soon. I'll be reverting the edits. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 21:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Hispanic Edits

Hi Jack,

my edits were accurate as Portugal did not belong to Hispania; instead, Portugal belonged to Lusitania. The current page is very confusing and also unclear, not to mention that the info is contradictory and inaccurate.

Any suggestions for improving this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gofast01 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

It is clear that Lusitania was a province of the Roman Empire and is therefore in no way relevant to the modern day definition of Hispanic. Hispania was the old English word for Spain, derived from the Spanish, Espania. However, South America was also settled by the Portuguese, so I think the article is fine in its present form. --Greenmaven (talk) 04:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Kanji

Helo, in Chinese, the genus Ailanthus is zh:臭椿属 which has the species zh:臭椿 chòu chūn (A. altissima), this also has an alternative old name. The genus Toona is zh:香椿屬 which has some species called chūn, such as zh:香椿 xiāng chūn (T. sinensis), zh:红椿 hóng chūn (T. ciliata), etc. So I think real chūn belongs to Toona instead of Ailanthus, or maybe we should mention both genera. Greenknight dv (talk) 11:38, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I bow to your superior knowledge in this matter. Please edit as you see fit. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

My editings

Dear Jack, I believe there is a mistake in the fact that you took down the editing done to the page Vishnu that I added. As the page says there are many avatars of Vishnu, which Zach is indeed one of, but sadly he is not considered of among the top eleven. I did not know where to mention him, and i found that that was the best place. Afterwards I tried to add him to the list of names of Vishnu which also was taken off. I apologize for any troubles but I feel that Zach deserves recognition. Thank You.With Hope, Zkala — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zkala (talk • contribs) 02:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

In several places, the article refers to ten avatars of Vishnu. Therefore adding an eleventh avatar invalidates other parts of the article. Perhaps having Zach taken out of another article suggests you are not on the right track. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 02:22, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Belated Happy Third Wiki Birthday for 5 November! 220 of Borg 05:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Bob Carr's Page

Hi there, I edited Bob Carr's profile about a month ago, as I'm creating a page and would like to reference this once published. You deleted my edit, but I would like to include something in his profile about his involvement with Australian based animal protection group, Voiceless . I am new to Wikipedia, so please let me know how you think this is best displayed. Thanks Alimentari2013 (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me. I have restored your edit to Bob Carr, and added the reference you have supplied above. I will add something to your Talk Page about editing a new article. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 04:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

JAGS

C'mon, the Jags are only sorta a professional football team.

my editings

Hello again Jack,
      I do not believe that you received the message I sent to you. So, I would like to tell you again that the form of Vishnu, Zach, is 

indeed a constructive addition to the page Vishnu. I am sorry that I misplaced where I put the information. According to Hinduism, there

are many forms of Vishnu, and there are ten main avatars. Sadly, Zach is not one of the top ten, but he is "up there". I do not know where

to put the information about Zach, so I ask if you could allow me to add him to a fitting place. Thank You.

                                                                                                                       With Hope,
                                                                                                                           Zkala  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zkala (talk • contribs) 00:59, 28 November 2013 (UTC) 

It would be helpful if you would sign your posts to Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Signatures. It would also be easier to help you if you provided a link to the article you are talking about: like this Vishnu. Also, the strange way in which your post (above) is displaying, is caused by you putting one or more spaces at the start of the line. I will write again when I have checked further. --Greenmaven (talk) 01:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

It might be useful for you to read Dashavatara. It seems clear that there is a strong tradition of there being ten avatars of Vishnu. Zach is not one of them and in fact I have not been able to find any reference on the internet to 'Zach' as a Hindu entity. --Greenmaven (talk) 01:42, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Reverts to 3-4 defense

Why are you reverting my edits to 3-4 defense? The Bills do play some 3-4, but it is not their base defense. Here is a cite: http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/depth/_/name/buf/formation/4-3-defense. The parts I deleted from Wikipedia state—without a citation—that the Bills play a 3-4 defense.

It is really frustrating for newcomers to edit Wikipedia — every time I come on, someone always reverts my edits. I feel like there is a status quo bias and the bias should instead be in favor of providing accurate information, which sometimes means that information should stay off a page while the truth is hashed out. 71.186.236.30 (talk) 05:16, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry to hear you are feeling frustrated as a new editor. I deleted your edit because, unfortunately, some sports fans edit articles in line with their opinions or biases, rather than by the facts, and your edit looked like one of those. I agree that where the facts are disputed, the article should be discussed - and the place to do it is the 'article talk page' here Talk:3–4 defense. I suggest you add some comments to the talk page, together with your citation above. Meantime, I will undo my reversion of your edit, as I am convinced you are editing in good faith. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 05:28, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Double-entry bookkeeping system

No problem as you informed to undo the Double-entry bookkeeping system. Mainly I feel the essay is outdated that cannot reflect the recent application of the methodology "Double-entry bookkeeping system". Now I am writing other relevant article titled Multiway Data Analysis. May be I will try to write more notable updated source information in a way not limited to cover the very beginning of the history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgt88drcr (talk • contribs) 11:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I will watch both articles. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 21:37, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

edting

Hi Jack Greenmaven. this is 197.87.114.112 I Just received a message from you, that you deleted some of my EDITS on either Oliver or " Bora Bora". The changes I made are still online. I only removed some ridiculous claims about Oliver and the island of bora Bora being 99% gay, lol. Should i have messed up something else, sorry, it was not intentional.

best regards and a great weekend! D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.87.114.112 (talk) 13:53, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I have just checked Oliver. It was you that added the word 'gay' and I removed it. --Greenmaven (talk) 21:44, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I have also checked Bora Bora. In this case you did remove vandalism. Thank you. --Greenmaven (talk) 21:47, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Avianca edit

With all your respect, but are you ignorant? If you see the aircraft name "olafo" in the name with the Colombian Spanish identify the comic "Hägar the Horrible" (Olafo, el Amargado). I was not vandalizing that page, but I was trying to explain the origin of the nickname of that plane. --190.84.80.134 (talk) 03:18, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

you seem to be picking on the wrong editor. My edit to Avianca Flight 011 did not alter the reference to Hägar the Horrible. --Greenmaven (talk) 03:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

real money

i'm the guy to lazy to log in or 4tilde sign re my snotty comment i don't mind; I was just trying, for about the 100th time , to get experts to write at a level apprpopriate for a general work the point is, the example is the only part that is clear and understandable; the rest is full of jargon that is just crap final point, given the long history and debate, the time for which the commercial paper is good for should be a free variable thanks

In fact, given the overly complex tone of the intr, my comment was in fact helpful, in the strict dictionary sense of the word !!

also, the whole thing is cribbed directly from M Sproul, so fairness requires telling the reader that