User talk:MusikAnimal/old talkpage

Where this user is, it is 12:04 am, 15 July 2024 UTC [refresh].

Hello from Tsufit

Hello, I wrote about Landscape Architect Gil Har-Gil, but it was deleted because it appears to have no references. I would like to try again, can I use the firm website (http://english.landscape.org.il/) as a reference? Thank you, Tsufitצופית תור (talk) 05:46, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

@צופית תור: So sorry for taking so long to get back to you! Yes, Gil Har-Gil was deleted because it was a biography on a living person without any reliable sources. Per policy, these types of articles have to have at least one source. This policy was a result lawsuits that happened way back when. Anyways, to answer your question, articles should be based on secondary sources and not primary sources. I might also add there's a notability guideline on people. If you feel the subject does meet this guideline, feel free to make another attempt at the article. You could alternatively submit a draft of the article for review before it gets published. If the review passes, you can be fairly assured the article won't get deleted again. You can use the article wizard to create the draft. Let me know if you need any help! — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:01, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I will try again, as i think i've got this 2 subjects: The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times. And the person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.

How can I be sure that it wont be deleted again? צופית תור (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Just a question

Howdy MusikAnimal, I have a question, let there be two editors, X editor and Y editor. Both of them were editing and improving an article, X editor thought to change its citation style from {{cite}} to {{Sfn}}. And X editor started changing it being WP:Bold. Suddenly Y editor reverted the change with an edit summary WP:CITEVAR and WP:CONSENSUS. X editor started a thread for consensus at it's talk page. Y editor was having a disagreement with X editor. Although the article looks like a mess and have heavy citation clutter with {{Cite}} but still Y editor supported using {{Cite}} with reasons like, Newbies will not understand how {{Sfn}} works. Suddenly another newbie came in and supported editor X. Y editor almost confused and can't handle the situation, he left messages at two admins talk page (Both the admins were good friends of Y editor) and started calling them at the articles talk page for discussion although both the admins have no relation with the article (never have edited that page). Y editor explained one of the admin at the admins talk page that X editor is an inexperienced newbie (X editor helped 1 article to meet GA, 1 article to meet FL and have started 3 DYKs). One of the admin came and took the side of Y editor and accused X editor for WP:BATTLE. I have tried my best to explain the case, now the question arises who is correct, X editor or Y editor?? Didn't Y editor actually canvassed when he called those unrelated admins (admin interven was not required)?? Is it correct to call X editor inexperienced newbie when he have done some good works like DYK, FL, GA?? Did X editor used common sense?? Thanks, Jim Carter (from public cyber) 12:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jim Carter - Public: This is probably easier to assess if you'd just point me to where the dispute is actually taking place. But without getting involved, I'd say X must not be a "newbie" and calling them one is not really fair. WP:CITEVAR is good rationale to retain {{cite}}. If it's a major overhaul to replace one citation style with another, maybe it's not worth it. In the end, which template to use of course yields to consensus. While you might consider it canvassing, I'd like to think the admins (being admins) are not swayed by Y's words, and their input is honest and impartial. Consider opening a request for comment if you feel a more broader consensus is needed. Perhaps the RfC could add clarity to WP:CITEVAR and if need be warrant a change to the guideline. — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:10, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Actually this was a question I thought of asking you since I was not present during your RfA. Good answers! Jim Carter (from public cyber) 03:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from GAwes

Hi MusikAnimal I just wanted to say that I'm sorry about what I changed I just thought to change the last name because she got married and I thought she got married and when women get married they change there last name so I thought to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GAwes (talk • contribs) 17:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@GAwes: No problem. I apologize for misinterpreting your edit as being unconstructive. The lead explains that her name changed as of the series finale, I assume Zbornak was still retained as the page name as it is the more well known. You can start a discussion on the talk page if you feel the page should be renamed. Moving forward, if you wish to rename pages you will need to do so by moving the page. This requires your account be autoconfirmed. Hope this helps, cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Block of User:138.162.0.41

Did you notify the WMF? I thought about blocking but didn't, but I did click on the block button and saw the instructions to notify. It's at WP:SIP. I don't know what happens in practice. Dougweller (talk) 20:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: I did not, nor did I know it was sensitive! Where did you see the notice? I admittedly did not think about it given the extensive block log. 138.* is also not listed at the top-right of Special:Block as sensitive. I'll get on IRC and ask somebody about it. That IP range has caused massive amounts of damage, at least to Kevin Kelly (politician), where I just finally revdel'd all the BLP violations. Thanks for the notice! — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:40, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

138.162.0.0 - 138.162.255.255 (138.162.0.0/16) is listed at WP:SIP. Not everything shows up on the block page, which is a serious pain. Dougweller (talk) 20:42, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: Notified on meta. I think I'm safe... many of the other IPs in that range are blocked, and apparently the department of defense IPs aren't as critical as other sensitive ranges. Thanks again for bringing this to my attention! — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure you're safe, just wondered if you did it because the IP isn't mentioned on the blocking page, and I thought you might not have noticed - I didn't realise for a long time there was another page with more IP ranges. Dougweller (talk) 05:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from jayp316

yes i thin you made a mistake when you removed this external link Following his debut EP ‘The Florida Files,’ B. Smyth is taking time for the ladies with his new Bigg D & Lamb produced track, “Twerkoholic.” The young R&B star on the rise pays homage to the old school with the sexy jam that samples “Love You Down” by Ready For The World.

The reason being is because Twerkoholic is the name of one of his latest songs that nobody knows about. This song is a very nice slow jam, it's just the title that's misleading. Jayp316 (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jayp316: I understand you are trying to add new information about the subject, but your edits sound more like social commentary and lack an encyclopedic tone. crooner B. Smyth is doing it for the ladies in his new video is not appropriate for Wikipedia. We want to simply state the facts and disregard opinions, something like In 2014 Smyth released a new music video entitled "Twerkaholic". Also, instead of writing Read more at [this website] you could simply use that website as a reference. I recommend reviewing the five pillars of Wikipedia, which explains what we're all about. You can learn how to add references at Help:Referencing for beginners. Let me know if you need help, thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:06, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Your E61 filter blocking good edits

Look, will you remove this rubbish which is disallowing scores of good edits and actively harming the project. 90.199.67.62 (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The filter I wrote does not disallow edits, it warns and then tags them. However, I see no error with the filter, as the edit you are trying to make to Yulia Bessolova would incorrectly add your signature into the article. Is there a reason why you are trying to do that? — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from 31.205.91.168

Hello, I am the person who has been editing the page on Morisco. Yes, you have made a mistake. I have been reading the supposed sources, and what the sources say is not reflected in the wikipedia article at all. There is no such thing as Sub-Saharan connection mentioned in the study. The other mention on studies that I deleted I specifically said it was not specified in the text. I was also adding to one of the studies explaining the origin of genetic markers. I am not vandalizing I am actually writing what has the sources say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.205.91.168 (talk) 21:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, I was just wondering why I got Rollback and then had it revoked? I know I don't have many edits and would understand you denying me, but I am just curious so I can improve it in the future. Thanks. VeNeMousKAT (talk|contribs) 02:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind just read the reassesment. VeNeMousKAT (talk|contribs) 02:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes sorry about that. I've provided further clarification on your talk page. — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Orangetack

I was just bored to so I did that hoping someone would see it before it was edited back! xDxDxDxD Yeah you probably think I'm stupid....... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangetack (talk • contribs) 09:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from MirrorFreak

Hey MusikAnimal. I was wondering whether you could help me create a guestbook page. If you could that would be great. Thanks, Mirror Freak 13:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind dude. I made it here. You should sign it! Mirror Freak 14:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Vactryl - Celebrate Recovery Section Updates 08-21-14

I spent a lot of time adding language to the Celebrate Recovery section of Wikipedia. I also spent time formatting the information. I do understand your concerns about not citing items properly and possibly quoting more than I should have. I have created a complete bibliography to add to the page,and I will rewrite some sections per your advice. However, I would prefer to not have to reenter and reformat everything I submitted before. Is there a way I can access what I added and you removed so that I can edit the article, instead of trying to recreate it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vactryl (talk • contribs) 00:44, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

@Vactryl: Hey! Yes, it is important that you do not copy and paste text from other sources, everything should be in your own words. I see your change also contained no references. Wikipedia aims to have all content verifiable, which means it should be accompanied by reliable sources. See WP:REFBEGIN on how to add references. Finding your previous contributions is easy, just look for the "Contributions" link at the top-right. From there you can click on the "prev" links to get what's called a diff, which is the difference of that revision and the one before it. Your change can be found here. Let me know if you need anymore help! — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I revised the page considerably. I added citations the best I could, but I am not sure they are in the format that is normal for Wikipedia. I am a little unfamiliar with citations formats here. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vactryl (talk • contribs) 03:07, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh the irony.

But it was ironic...Pictureframedude (talk) 16:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Nicholas McDonald

Background : Special:Diff/622347676#In the Arms of an Angel

The X Factor (UK series 10) - Another page that has been targeted for a few weeks now. If you look at the contributions from the 95.83.253.* range (link)- Almost all edits are addition of contentious BLP material.  NQ  talk 14:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

@NQ: I've semi-protected the page for two weeks. Looks like this will be an ongoing issues from this IP range, and not just with subject of McDonald. Fortunately there are other measures we can take beyond page protection that I will look into. Thanks for letting me know! — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:35, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou!  NQ  talk 18:14, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

• Interview: Improving the visibility of digital archival assets using Wikipedia

• Traffic report: Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero

• WikiProject report: Bats and gloves

• Op-ed: A new metric for Wikimedia

• Featured content: English Wikipedia departs for Japan

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

A block evader

Thanks for blocking User:Kblfan and his IP, 71.233.191.90. He's trying to evade the block yet again with a new IP (see Joshua Vescovi edit history). The new IP is 174.236.36.17. Can you block this other one too? Jrcla2 (talk) 01:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jrcla2: Blocked. Based on the WHOIS that IP was likely the user's mobile device. Those IPs tend to change based on location, so I've also reluctantly protected the page as the user may very well have a new IP at any moment. Probably safe to close the AfD discussion as delete based on apparent consensus, but I'll leave that to another admin — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick action! Jrcla2 (talk) 03:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Middle East Eye

Hello there, we have the right to change those allegations against us as they are not true.

If there is a better way to change them then please advice otherwise we will have to remove the content.

Thank you Middle East Eye (talk) 14:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@Middle East Eye: Two problems right off the bat. First off, it is against policy to have an account that represents multiple persons. For this reason I have blocked your account, but feel free to create a new one representing only yourself. Secondly, as noted on your talk page, you should use an edit summary when making changes, in this case removing a large amount of sourced material. You are also inadvertently removing references that you apparently wish to keep, and the article's categories. Don't worry about that, I can fix that. For now, instead of removing the content again, let's discuss on the article's talk page, where we can find a consensus as to whether or not we should retain the content in whole or part. Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from John768

Hi MusicAnimal,

This is a member of the Middle East Eye. It was I who created previously the username Middle East Eye but I was blocked.

We want to remove the content written about us as we believe it is inaccurate and therefore is deceiving the public. We can prove that we are the actual Middle East Eye company but please do let us know what we need to send you or how do we come about it to prove that we are the official MEE and we will be happy to do that.

We would like to change most of the content written about us as soon as possible.

Thank you and hope to hear from you

(talk page stalker) Hi @John768: and I'm one of MusikAnimal's friendly talk page stalkers. The case you are referring to is a conflict of interest. You may want to read WP:COI if you are going to continue to edit about your company. Also, the information you removed or verifiable which were supported by reliable sources.  ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 17:17, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@John768: Hey, sure I can help you. For right now I don't think it is necessary that you prove your identity. The content that makes up Wikipedia is based on previously published information, supported by reliable sources. So if you have good sources backing what you're saying, there's no need to prove who you are, the sources prove everything. Similarly, you cannot remove well-sourced material just because you don't agree with it. I think this may be the problem you are having with Middle East Eye. The content you tried to remove appears to be well-sourced, yet you say it is inaccurate. May I ask what you think is inaccurate? Note that it says Allegations of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, I don't think it is specifically stating that was true. True or not, the allegations may still be considered encyclopedic, as it was reported in the national media. I agree with TheQ Editor that you should be careful not to exert a conflict of interest when editing Wikipedia. We want to take into account all viewpoints, positive and negative, in a healthy balance that gives the reader unbiased, factual information. — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

We have no issues to state balanced information. However, the content doesn't state facts and that is our issue. It will be hard to refute "allegations" as this is an opinion and we have to prove a negative. The person that wrote this content wasn't obviously neutral nor balanced and spoke on behalf of the national. Maybe it is the national themselves. Is it possible to change the content along with its sources? We could refer to different sources. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by John768 (talk • contribs)

@John768: I've moved this discussion to the article's talk page. Let's continue our discussion there. Please also remember to sign your posts by putting four tildes at the end (~~~~). Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:40, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of nearest exoplanets

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of nearest exoplanets. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MusikAnimal. You have new messages at Gourami Watcher's talk page.
Message added 02:45, 26 August 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GouramiWatcher^(?) 02:45, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

The IP you blocked and then unblocked

84.211.129.189 (talk · contribs) ignored the warning, so I've blocked. And for a month. The idea is to stop this and I don't think anything will but a block. Dougweller (talk) 10:32, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

No problemo. My instinct was to do the same, but I hadn't noticed that another admin had already declined the AIV report, hence why I unblocked. Cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:46, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Joshua Vescovi / User:Kblfan and his IP socks

Can you please indefinitely page-protect Joshua Vescovi until the inevitable deletion at the article's AfD? Literally minutes after the protection was removed another IP sock of User:Kblfan removed the AfD tag.

Or, as an admin, can you close the AfD per SNOW, delete the article, then salt it? There's no chance in hell it's going to survive the AfD at this point and by having the article still exist is only prolonging the annoyance and disruptive editing that Kblfan/his IP socks are causing. Jrcla2 (talk) 13:19, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:INVOLVED wouldn't apply here, so I've closed, deleted, and salted. Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick work of this. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Actually, any chance you could SALT Josh Vescovi too? I could see Kblfan recreating the article under an abbreviated name. If you don't think that'd be necessary I'll go with your judgment, but this user has been particularly disruptive and insistent on the article's existence. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

In theory it would make perfect sense, but procedurally I'd say we should wait until we have concrete reason to protect as that's generally not done preemptively. — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:44, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Ok that's fine. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:56, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello from 68.14.229.131

All I am trying to do is update the incorrect information currently written on Sieve Analysis. The current statements on Digital Processing are incorrect.

REPLACE THIS TEXT WITH YOUR MESSAGE 68.14.229.131 (talk) 15:24, 26 August 2014 (UTC) August 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm MusikAnimal. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Sieve analysis because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! — MusikAnimal talk 15:14, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. WNYY98 (talk) 15:21, 26 August 2014 (UTC)