Jump to content

User talk:KSFT

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vaxine19 (talk | contribs) at 21:55, 17 November 2015 (→Rihanna - Anti). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This talk page is not archived, so it's pretty long.

KSFTC 23:16, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, KSFT, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 01:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

EDC Paris Business School

Hello KSFT, how are you ? Thank you for your Work on Wikipedia. So, yes I not explain why because it's not finish but as you seen all the information that i have add in EDC Paris Business School are true with all the references. Is it possible to restore all the work ? I try to complete this page with all the informations that EDC Paris Business school give me to complete this page so I think that you made a mistake because you can verify the informations which is important for the presentation of the school. It doesn't matter but can can you restore the work please ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLYSERIZZ (talk • contribs) 23:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


June 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Fetya (Nasyid) has been reverted.
Your edit here to Fetya (Nasyid) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://m.facebook.com/FetyaOfficial/about?expand_all=1, https://m.facebook.com/FetyaOfficial/about?expand_all=1) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 01:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fetya (Nasyid)

Hi! I noticed a bot was giving you trouble with that DB tag. No idea why. If there's proof of copy-vio related stuff at that URL it's definitely allowed. One tip though, try combining multiple CSD tags into a single {{Db-multiple}} tag like this: {{Db-multiple|G11|A7}}. Keeps things a bit more manageable. --Non-Dropframe talk 01:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. I was wondering if there was a better way to do that. I hope I'm signing my post correctly. KSFT (talk) 02:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar

A new editor on the right path
Well done in your contributions! Don't be afraid to ask for help and don't be afraid of making mistakes -- we all do. --Non-Dropframe talk 02:32, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Information icon Hello KSFT. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), or content (CSD A3), moments after they are created, as you did at The Art of Robert Fisher. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.Template:Z149 --Non-Dropframe talk 01:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I guess I missed that part of the description. I undid my edit to that page. KSFT (talk) 01:05, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Llavador

Hi, you've just tagged Carlos Llavador as an orphan, but there are two articles linking to it: Men's foil at the 2013 World Fencing Championships and 2015 European Fencing Championships, so I'm a bit puzzled as to the message. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:33, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think the wording of the template could be improved, but I was following Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol#Collaborate_with_article_creators, which says this:
If the article has less than three incoming links (from actual articles, excluding pages in other namespaces like User talk, Talk, Wikipedia, etc.) add { {Orphan} } to the top of the page.
KSFT talk 18:37, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, OK. I don't see any way to add more links at the moment, but thanks for the explanation. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gybowman

Hi, I am in an edit-a-thon for Gay and Lesbian materials. I am entering the comic artists for Gay Comix, in the hope that people would add information as it is discovered. I also wanted to add something to the stubs for these artists, as opposed to having a blank stub which might be later conflated with other people with the same name.

Are they notable? It depends on your interest in the gay history.

Is that a problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gybowman (talk • contribs) 19:50, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Copyright violations

Thank you for your concern. Another Wikipedia user warned me of this issue here. It turns out that these websites are taking these plot summaries from Wikipedia articles and claiming them as their own. I am getting these plot summaries from the show's respective season pages. Wikipedia user Crow told me it was okay to put these plot summaries in each article as long as I put "Article created with content copied from The Blacklist (season 1), see that page for attribution" whenever I create an article that copies the plot from the respective season. Rp0211 (talk2me) 21:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Crow explained it to me three minutes ago on your talk page. KSFT talk 21:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Algemeen Christelijk Vakverbond (logo).svg

Thanks for uploading File:Algemeen Christelijk Vakverbond (logo).svg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new

Dear KSFT,

The reason that I tried to remove the page Zhang Nanju is because I am new to wikipedia and I'm not sure what I'm doing. I wasn't sure if the page was necessary and if it needed to be on wikipedia. It seems as though you need to know code to contribute to wikipedia, and I do not know code. I would like to contribute but don't know how. Odudley954 (talk) 02:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)Odudley954[reply]

That's fine; I understand. I'm actually pretty new, too. I just noticed that you were actually the one who created that article, which means that the notice I left on your talk page was actually completely irrelevant (whoops). (I also now realize that I forgot to sign my post on your talk page.) I am curious about why you would create an article then try to delete it immediately, though. I don't see anything wrong with it being on Wikipedia. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "know code", but there are some helpful links for getting started here on my talk page. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the teahouse (WP:Q has more details), or I could help you if you post here again. KSFT talk 02:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KSFT, What I meant by "code" is all the referencing and the sourcing. I am not very good at that, and I'm not sure what the requirements are and if I am doing them correctly. That is my problem. I would like to contribute, but I don't know if I'm doing it right. Odudley954 (talk) 04:01, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Odudley954[reply]

Odudley954, you might want to check out Referencing for beginners, and see f that helps. If not the teahouse or the Help desk are good places to ask questions. DES (talk) 19:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging of FILTHY ROCKWELL

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on FILTHY ROCKWELL. I do not think that FILTHY ROCKWELL fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because "grammy nominated writer" is a claim of significence. I request that you consider not re-tagging FILTHY ROCKWELL for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk) 19:44, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man

Hi. Thanks for this. I don't think I've ever been told, effectively, to "go fuck myself" before. Frankly I'm tempted to take it to WP:ANI as his behaviour seem too far beyond the pale for words. However, in looking at the edits that I made I can accept that employing the common phrase of "fucking up" (much a part of my native argot, more than anything) was ill-advised. What's your take? Pyrope 21:25, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyrope: @The Rambling Man: Let's continue this discussion here. I really just saw lots of reverts and swearing before posting on TRM's talk page. I'll read over the edits and let you know what I think. I just read through those edits, and I don't know much about citations, but it looks like TRM violated WP:CIVIL, and WP:AGF, while Pyrope was being un-WP:CIVIL after being provoked, though Pyrope did continue posting on TRM's talk page after being specifically (though rudely) asked to stop. KSFT talk 21:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again KSFT, I'd appreciate a third party take a look at this before escalating to formal proceedings. I see in his response to you on his talk page that he considers my description of his behaviour and actions as a personal attack on him, which he then uses to justify his own sneering, non-AGF and actually attacking edit summaries. Ho hum. Pyrope 21:35, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, who used "fucking" first? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Its a word, in common usage, and it was used as part of a common phrase to describe your actions and not you personally. Perhaps, as I said, ill-advised, but as KSFT mentions, following provocation. Your edit summary "try some compliance with mos, consistency of formatting, and all that, or do you think you own this article?" was frankly more funny than alarming, particularly as your edits actually made things on that article worse, not better, with respect to citation formatting guides within the MoS (hence my reversion summary "more harm than good"). I come across people like you quite a lot here, and I have to admit that I do love to prick the pompous, especially when their pomposity is entirely misplaced and unjustified. People who think that they are unimpeachable yet are making just as many mistakes and poor edits as the rest of us schlubs muddling through. People who use auto-generated boilerplate edit summaries that obscure their actions to other editors and call upon the might MoS (*sounds of harps and heavenly chorus*) when trying to get their way, but are actually editing in contravention of the MoS. People who think nothing of launching direct, obscene personal attacks when they think that they might have suffered some lack of due deference from the proles. Pyrope 21:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's always a shame when two very experienced editors get pissed at each other; for relatively new editors, it's like getting Between Scylla and Charybdis. They'll iron it out themselves, or it will peter out, or it will be taken to a noticeboard somewhere with much gnashing of teeth and little result. But there was no real benefit to you issuing a warning (particularly to only one of them). In this particular case, TRM (or any editor) can remove stuff from his talk page whenever he wants; P should not have been reverting that removal, and there was no 3RR violation (you seem to misunderstand that policy). And the term "fucking up" was first used by P, and TRM was evidently throwing it back at him in edit summaries (i.e. take your "fucking" elsewhere); it is not the same as saying "go fuck yourself" (OK, I see, it was). These kinds of things wouldn't happen if people followed the Platinum Rule, but around here everyone is incrementally ruder to the person they think was wrong/rude, but is always shocked when the other person is then incrementally more rude in return, and it always spirals out of control. Eggshells armed with hammers. But it is often made worse by well meaning people sticking their noses in (like I'm doing now!). --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Floquenbeam: Am I misunderstanding WP:3RR? It specifically says "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page...A "page" means any page on Wikipedia, including talk...space". Nevermind, exception 2 covers userspace. I have edited my original comment.
;-) Pyrope 22:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More notes on your request

Hello KSFT. I think that others have already pointed these out on your talk. You thought there was a possible WP:3RR situation at an editor's talk page, but WP:3RRNO point #2 gives the owner of a talk page freedom to undo any posts without that counting against 3RR. There's also an A7 speedy deletion tag that could easily have been avoided with a bit of Googling and an issue with tagging new pages too soon after creation. But, please continue and just try not to make too many waves until you have more experience. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Heart Island

Hey, were you the one who put the tag for references on there? I do not think that is needed for 2 sentences. ThatKongregateGuy (talk) 12:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@ThatKongregateGuy: Yeah, I did tag Heart Island as unreferenced, as it did not have any references. It still doesn't have any, so I'm not sure why you removed it. Are you claiming that WP:V doesn't apply to stubs? KSFTC 18:16, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol

If you tag a new page for cleanup or deletion, be sure to mark it as reviewed as well. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 19:38, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@I dream of horses: Unless I'm not sure about something and want another editor to also look at a new article, I have been marking pages I review as patrolled. KSFTC 19:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much...

...for your words of support over at my RfA. I shall strive to be worthy of the honor. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


History of Iceland

The section I removed is unsourced and sounds like it was written by a 14 year old. I removed it because it fell well below the tenor of the rest of the entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C06A:730:2422:77DD:91AE:BFB7 (talk) 00:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@2602:30A:C06A:730:2422:77DD:91AE:BFB7: I didn't look carefully at what you removed (although now I know I should in the future), but do make sure to include an edit summary next time, so you can explain what you're doing and why. I'll remove it again if it hasn't been already. KSFTC 00:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Zeitgeist (film_series)#Reception

Hi. I removed some text in the Zeitgeist (film series) article. I thought I put the edit summary in correctly. "Tightened up sentence in Irish Review, Constant review already quoted in own paragraph, NY Times article is on Zday and doesn't contain that criticism". I'm not sure how it triggered the software, but it is a good faith edit. 70.36.233.104 (talk) 15:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@70.36.233.104: Ah, I see; you're totally right. I apologize. KSFTC 15:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. It is cool that it can catch stuff that fast though. 70.36.233.104 (talk) 15:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome from WP:STiki!

Hello, KSFT, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! Thanks for downloading and trying out the STiki tool. Unfortunately, your first use came at a time when STiki was experiencing some technical difficulties, so your test-drive probably wasn't as positive as the STiki community would have liked. Because of edit ingestion problems you probably experienced an usually low "hit rate" (the percentage of edits a user sees that they revert). Typically these numbers hover in the 20-33% range, so I encourage you to come back and give us another try. Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Free Agency

Isn't DeAndre Jordan a Free Agent? It says that on the Clippers Roster?

UVABallers (talk) 18:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@UVABallers: I have no idea whether that's true or not, but in Wikipedia articled, content must be verifiable, which means it must be cited to a reliable source. If there is one for that fact, then absolutely cite it and undo my edit. KSFTC 18:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)r[reply]

Baku (spirit)

Why did you send me that warning?My edits at "Baku" are referenced.And don't say it is an unreliable reference.You even called them "vandalism". Rolandi+ (talk) 19:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply] 

And this???Do you call this reliable? Here:[1] Rolandi+ (talk) 19:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


TejGavate

Thank you for your help. I have made a few changes to the info. Please check it and if possible try to point out the mistakes. Tejgavate (talk) 07:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A7 educational institutions (The University of Akron: School of Music)

Hey there,

I removed your A7 CSD criteria from The University of Akron: School of Music because there is a universal exception to CSD A7 for educational institutions - all educational institutions are notable. :)

| Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 18:59, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Naypta: Huh...I've read that so many times, but I guess I just somehow completely missed that. KSFTC 19:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, it happens to everyone =P Have a great wikiday! | Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 19:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third Eye Solutions

Hi KSFT,

Thanks for all that you do as a wikipedia editor. I wanted to message you to talk about the entry I created for "Third Eye Solutions." You'd flagged the entry as being unambiguously promotional and I was hoping to get a little more clarity as to why this was the case. The page merely stated a few facts about the company, and went out of its way to provide encyclopedic content on related topics to provide a larger depth of information. I modeled the portion that discusses the company by looking at the EZLynx wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EZLynx

If you could help me understand why the EZlynx wiki page meets the wikipedia criteria, but the Third Eye Solutions page did not, it would be greatly appreciated.

In fact, if you could offer any tips on further revisions to help meet the wikipedia critera, it would be an immense help.

Kind Regards,

Hershal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hershal P (talk • contribs) 15:14, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hershal P: The article has been deleted, so I can't look at it to see what the problem was specifically, but the other article you linked to does look partly promotional, so I have tagged it for cleanup. The criteria for speedy deletion of promotional articles are here. KSFTC 23:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Pavlov's RfA reward

Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Support so you get a whopping three cookies, fresh from the oven!
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Edited page of Alchemy

Respected sir.. I think dose nt knw more history of alchemy cause till 2012 the ancient name alchemy given by Arabic wrd but you or other else edited it " the arab borrow the name alchemy" how a discstng dear.. You all of knw our elder did a trmnds wrk for all of science... But now a days the history... Oh not only histry.. The realities hidden.. I m really sry if any word or anythng hurts u but its my duty to aware u from realities.. Just one time think abt it thn reply.. Take care Ziyahashmi (talk) 04:59, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Carnegie

Hello KSFT,

As I've recently read Andrew Carnegie's Autobiography, I noticed a mistake in Wikipedia with regards to the information about him. I just wanted to ask you to check the Andrew Carnegie article you edited. Particularly the figures with regards to his Net Worth. If he gave away 90% of his wealth and according to many sources he was worth around $250-300 billion today, how come 90% of his wealth is $4.76 billion. That's more like 2% of his wealth! I believe you used some website to calculate the inflation which, as far as I am aware, starts from 1913. Therefore, you cannot calculate how much $480 million in 1901 was worth today. Even in 1913 the sum is way, way lower than it should be. Andrew Carnegie is the second richest men in the American history, he could not have sold his company for $13 billion.

According to Forbes in 2006 he was worth $281.2 billion http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/14/richest-americans-alltime-biz_cx_pw_as_0914ialltime_slide_3.html

Please, correct this as it creates confusion. There is a documentary by History Channel (The Men Who Built America) where his biographer, David Nasaw, explains that when Andrew sold his Carnegie Steel Company to J.P. Morgan for $480 million, it was what is the equivalent of $400 billion today. The programme was launched in 2012.

Thank you very much for your time! Carnegie Fan

Speedy deletion declined: Johann Gottfried Pratsch

Hello KSFT. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Johann Gottfried Pratsch, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Someone who died in the 17th century probably merits an AFD, has an article in de.wp and a VIAF authority control file. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 05:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

zonuz

you have mentioned a lot of wrong and mistake points about zonuz as seen on web address :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zonuz if you are not familiar with this city please do not furnish Wrong information . in Demographics part all is wrong and in other parts some points are wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.176.163.225 (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, Thank you for your amendments but origins of zonouzian people are Azerbaijanian Turkish not mixed with other nationality. as a Ref. please take a look to national Geographic society languages map . Washington DC august 1999. there are a lot of facts that indicated information provided by you and published in above web address are wrong. Thank you for your attention and please do amendment and or let me do my self. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.176.166.233 (talk) 07:59, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:41:01, 31 August 2015 review of submission by Pentz.peter


Hi KSFT,

Thank you for reviewing our submission of Greeks of the Sea Documentary Series.

This Series has been shown on one of the major Television Networks in Australia which is listed in the external links. There was a lot of press coverage for the series. I just don't know how to improve this from here? The content was researched and written by ourselves so perhaps it is the difference between Referencing and External Links which I do not get. So disappointed. What can I do to get this approved. Seen so many other TV documentaries being "out there" with a lot less references and external links.

Please could you help.

Thank you.

Peter

Pentz.peter (talk) 09:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pentz.peter:To show that something's notable, the links to sources that support it are supposed to be listed as references. I checked those, and they didn't establish notability. I should have looked more carefully at the external links too, though. They absolutely do establish notability. That was my fault. Re-submit the draft, and I'll accept it. KSFTC 14:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear KSFT, Many thanks for your prompt reply and for reviewing and accepting my concerns. I have resubmitted the article. Kind regards and thanks once again! Peter Pentz.peter (talk) 23:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear KFST,

The article is waiting for your acceptance. I know you must be very busy, but if you could please accept this it would be greatly greatly appreciated.

Many thanks for all your assistance with this.

Kind regards

Peter Pentz.peter (talk) 23:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References that someone added here for some reason

  1. ^ Hadland Davis F., "Myths and Legends of Japan" (London: G. G. Harrap, 1913)

Request on 10:08:42, 1 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Bigi111


You decline the article concerning Nicolas Gisin, submitted the 30 of August 2015. It's really a big surprise !!!

There are 36 references, You can search Nicolas Gisin or just Gisin on the Web to see that he is very well known in quantum physics and most of the references proves it. He is director of the Group of Applied Physics at the university of Geneva, and link to the Group Web page is given. Just for information, I'm Nicolas's brother (Bernard Gisin) and he review the article I submitted. There are so many references when you search : "Nicolas Gisin", https://www.google.ch/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Nicolas+Gisin

So the question is : what other reference do you want ?

Bigi111 (talk) 10:08, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The references all seem to be things he wrote himself, which means they aren't independent. There are several parts of the lead and first section that aren't cited. Also, submissions should be written with a neutral point of view, which some of your submission doesn't seem to be, as I noted in the comment I left. Finally, if you're his brother, you may have a conflict of interest, and you should probably let someone else create that article. KSFTC 17:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LLoyd Pye Article

Hello,

I am writing this in regard to an automatic edit about Lloyd Pye's article. Here goes:

"although DNA testing showed it to be from a human male"

I removed this because this report was flawed, and there are more recent reports:

2003 Trace genetics: mtDNA was recovered and identified as human, but nuDNA was not recovered. (Unlike BOLD, Trace genetics was was qualified for handling ancient DNA, and the BOLD lab was employing students, as opposed to qualified geneticists, and twice the students accidentally contaminated the bone samples.)

2010: 454 life sciences, geneticist unnamed: several nuDNA fragments, totaling up to 3,000 base pairs were recovered, slightly less than half was identified as human, while the other half remained unidentified (later, the unidentified sequences were found to have some similarities to sequences from bacterial genomes; not all were perfectly matched.

2011: 454 life sciences, same geneticist, unnamed: 4 mtDNA fragments were recovered (9.5% of all of the mtDNA), and found to have have 93 base pair variations. Pye extrapolated this total out to a statistically acceptable (not 100% correct) estimate of 800-1,000 variations, whereas humans only have 120 variations in mtDNA; this is because it is highly conserved, and only 3-5% is not vital for proper functioning of the mitochondria.

"although DNA testing showed it to be from a human male"

this report was written in 1999 by BOLD. they only recovered a fragment of DNA (which they said was human; a lot of people were handling the skull, and there were fingerprints, possibly sweat and skin cells deposited). also, lots of other organisms have human DNA, therefore the starchild could have been a monkey or ape (following the logic of the BOLD lab report).

I'm not trying to be offensive, repugnant, or malicious, but the old article is missing some relevant information.

ErednebE — Preceding unsigned comment added by EBenderednebE (talk • contribs) 22:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@EBenderednebE: Do you have a reference? Wikipedia requires that content be verifiable, which means that you need a reliable source for that information. If you have one, then you should add that information again and cite the source.
The starchild project. It is reliable, and they have taken the starchild skull very seriously; I know of no source more reliable about the starchild skull, no source more serious about it either. I am positive about this. I would not have mentioned the starchild project if I thought they were unreliable.EBenderednebE (talk) 22:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)ErednebE[reply]

By the way, you should sign you posts with four tiles: 

~~~~

That will automatically produce your signature with a timestamp. KSFTC 22:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sex Messenger

Hello, I am following the same estructure of the other sites listed. Why do you think it does not contribute? Cam50 camgirl (talk) 19:09, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

In your wikidictionary do you have the etmology of vandalism? Amakasaid (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noting errrors

Not trying intrude both I don't really like wiki wiki ish.but errors on Wikipedia affect the account accountability of my projects, so most times am just there minding my business scrolls and through wikis and I see lots and lots of murderous error wiki staff indeed more like hackers to be continued....ranting Amakasaid (talk) 19:19, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christian terrorism

dear,why u have deleted my edits in that article????

PALESTINE IS COMMITTING WAR CRIMES AGAINST ISRAELIS

PALESTINE IS BACKED BY TERRORIST RUSSIA

IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF ISRAEL FOR EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON IN THE MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL IS DEMOCRATIC

STOP THE PROPAGANDA

ISRAEL BRINGS PEACE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mervin Jonesey (talk • contribs) 06:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ophiuchus holds apart the serpent which with its mighty spirals and twisted body encircles his own, so that he may untie its knots and back that winds in loops. But, bending its supple neck, the serpent looks back and returns: and the other's hands slide

I am therefore I think I am. Therefore I am. I am 13th I am x X=1 Sorry everyone....it's time. 

Ophiuchus holds apart the serpent which with its mighty spirals and twisted body encircles his own, so that he may untie its knots and back that winds in loops. But, bending its supple neck, the serpent looks back and returns: and the other's hands slide over the loosened coils. The struggle will last forever, since they wage it on level terms with equal powers  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.150.137.225 (talk) 20:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

False report on an edit.

''''''I believe that you FaZe Clan'd me by 720 insta-swapping me like who are you kid? FaZe Adapt? You must think you're good but im better kid 1v1 Rust qs bro u aren't good bro fite me. ''''''--Pxri (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)————————≈≈≠≠≥±±÷÷[reply] 


              -Lizard Squad </3

Thank you for participating

Logo of Women in Red Logo of the Smithsonian Institution
Thank you for your interest in Women in Red and for your participation in the virtual Women in Leadership Edit-a-thon, 7-20 September 2015. It was a resounding success with over 160 new articles. Your contributions are appreciated! We'll keep you posted on future events. --Ipigott (talk) 09:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott: What? I have no idea what that is. KSFTC 20:04, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there KSFT. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply to you on this. It looked as if you had created the article Amina Bala-Zakari on 12 September but on rechecking I see you just moved it into the main space. As she was a leader, I assumed the article had been created as part of the editathon. Now I realize it was just a coincidence.--Ipigott (talk) 07:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops.

I am sorry. I did not know that I was offending anyone. I do not know exactly what less than neutral means. But I am pretty sure that they won the record. I could be wrong. But again, sorry. Mrs. Weasley12 (talk) 23:05, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

oh. Thank you. Now I know what I need to correct. Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrs. Weasley12 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rihanna - Anti

You reverted my change to Rihanna - Anti. I was not signed in and had the IP 70.88.236.93. The line I changed was:

'Jason Lipshutz of Billboard noted that the lyrical content of the song sounded inspired by Beyoncé's 2014 single "Flawless" '

That line is a complete misrepresentation of what the article says about the song and is frankly downright confusing as the song's lyrical content draws no inspiration whatsoever from the song 'Flawless'. It is rather the attitude of 'Flawless' that the song's lyrics draw inspiration from. That is what I intended to correct with my change. Does that make sense? Vaxine19 (talk) 21:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KSFT&oldid=691136312"