User talk:EvergreenFir

Season's greets!

Iryna Harpy (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Regarding speedy deletion of Photoshare page by User talk:Forbattleon

Hi, I am in the process of editing the Photoshare page as I go. I will be adding the reasons for why the site is credible and its sigificance in the next few hours. Please remove the tag for speedy deletion on my page. Thanks!

Please comment on Talk:A Free Ride

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:A Free Ride. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I need help

Hi. I have created a number of vector graphics and uploaded them in Wikipedia. I have also uploaded some photographs that I took and therefore hold copyright on. How do I resend license on them and have them removed from Wikipedia permanently? Yes, this is a serious question. Thanks Eric Cable  |  Talk  21:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@EricCable:, do you mean rescind? Tiderolls 22:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I think that's what they mean. And the honest answer is that I do not know how you would go about doing that. I suspect there is a way, but it's probably through the Commons. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes. rescind. Friggin auto correct. I will figure it out. Thanks. Eric Cable  |  Talk  23:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

When you upload anything to Wikipedai, whether it be text or images, you cannot take it back. This text is visible above the three buttons in every edit window.

By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL with the understanding that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient for CC BY-SA 3.0 attribution.

You have irrevocably agreed to release your contribution. Although you still hold the copyright, you have agreed for it to be used on Wikipedia. You cannot retract this. Blackmane (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of highest-grossing Indian films, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Siva (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the reference desk

Hi, don't want to get off on the wrong foot. I see from your user page that you are a grad student from OH. I grew up in OH and did my undergrad there, and sometimes I wish I could move back! Anyway, it's always good to see people on the ref desks that have some actual scholarly training and expertise, and who know how to find and share good references, so I hope you'll stick around :) SemanticMantis (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@SemanticMantis: Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:39, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions

That case at WP:ANI definitely falls with the discretionary sanctions, and Arbitration Enforcement is almost always a better forum than ANI. Thank you for the comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

My stellar performance of stupidity at ANI

Hi EvergreenFir. I got your message; thanks for letting me know about the magnificent display of derp that I managed to pull on ANI just a bit ago. I think I accidentally had an older revision open on my browser, and edited ANI to fix my message without realizing the explosion that hitting Save page would cause. I've fixed two of the three messages that I wiped from the face of the planet (I saw that you added your other message back). I apologize for the mistake; I hope that you can someday learn to forgive me, and that you limit your punishment to only 10 or 15 lashings. No, but seriously... I apologize for the issue, and I appreciate you for letting me know about it. Everything should be good to go now! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:50, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Haha! No worries at all. I think we've all done something similar. Just wanted to let you know about it was all. But if you want a trouting, I'm happy to give one. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pepperdine University

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Pepperdine University. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

User warning

Thanks for User:EvergreenFir/trans. I actually had need of it today for the Jordan Raskopoulos article. — Strongjam (talk) 13:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Strongjam: I am glad it was useful to you! :D EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

My response to you reply

I had to re add the date of birth of Miriam McDonald on her Wikipedia page, because it's true, and you don't believe it isn't. Telling me to Citing sources? Come on! The reply you sent was very arrogant and telling me don not add or change content...Wikipedia's slogan says THE FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA anybody can edit. What ever happened to Wikipedia? Ain't what it used to be when I've first joined in 2004.

Why is your talk page semi-protected?

Last week three other Wikipedians gave me heck and criticize and seriously complained my ways of editing and sort-of unorthodox. I had enough people complaining about my edits.

I'm a good Wikipedian. Thank you for your time and enjoy the 1st of March. Spencer H. Karter (talk) 00:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Shkarter1985: You must cite sources. Not optional. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Forcing me to cite sources from something...That doesn't make sense! Having moderators on Wikipedia doesn't make sense either! I didn't like it when you reverted back the edits I did on Miriam McDonald's Wikipedia page. I'm very upset you reverted back the edits. Spencer H. Karter (talk) 00:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Shkarter1985: Go read WP:5PILLARs and WP:CITE. If you continue to add that information without citation, you will almost certainly be blocked from editing. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

	The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
	Congratulations, EvergreenFir! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 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 Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

ANI questions: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sourced_content_deletion_on_Edward_VIII

EvergreenFir:

First, I appreciate your refactoring to include the collapsible section structure. Thank you.

Second, I do not appreciate your edit summary which suggests that my purpose for the questions was WP:POINTy. Using that guideline to understand my actions is a horrific violation of WP:AGF. To say that my actions are motivated by WP:POINT is to say that you believe I am "try[ing] to discredit" or somehow disrupt the ANI process. How dare you!

I asked those questions because the editors involved were getting rather personal and discussing content vs conduct. Tiptoethrutheminefield raised questions. DrKay raised some of his own. But little or no answers were happening from either side.

I simply isolated everyone's questions into separate topics so that each could be addressed individually. I used the subsection headers format so that each could be edited individually. This is a centuries old time-honored process called seriatim consideration, designed to make the process more manageable by allowing each allegation/question to have its own share of focus as needed.

How is this possibly disruptive or unhelpful when the conversation had already devolved into name-calling on the ANI page itself before I even arrived? Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 11:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Koala Tea Of Mercy: I dare many things. Honestly your edit looked disruptive, at least visually. It appeared entirely out of context with no explanation of what its purpose was. Just a wall of bold and red font. To me (and yes, this is just my subjective reading) it didn't seem to be helping resolve any dispute or calming things down. Entirely possible I misread something and it seems I did misread your intent so for that I am sorry. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe the "How dare you!" was a bit over the top. My apologies for that. WP:POINTy can be a very anti-AGF "weapon" and it irks me a lot when I see folks using it as such. First time it was ever applied to me and I guess I over-reacted. Thanks for recognizing that I really was not trying to be disruptive. Let's be honest, the discussion had already devolved into name calling right there on the ANI page. Pretty hard to be "disruptive" in the middle of a cat-fight. I just wanted the editors to discuss their behaviors and get some resolution. Unfortunately, even though both editors seem to have possibly been doing some bad behaviors it looks like another Admin hastily closed the ANI as a content dispute so there will be no resolution. That is regretable since both editors appear to be good contributors and the incident is very likely to fester if unresolved. I would hate to lose either Tiptoethrutheminefield or DrKay due to hurt feelings. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 19:34, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Koala Tea Of Mercy: Thank you for deescalating as well. I admit I wasn't fully assuming good faith when mentioning POINT and you're right that POINT is often brandished around to indicate bad faith. I've been working on being friendlier and AGF more, but sometimes I slip. Anyway, again I apologize for the POINT accusation. I am glad you found the refactor helpful though (I have some OCD thing against multiple subsection headings and recently learned that semi-colon trick). Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:52, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I think the answers to the questions were in the diffs I gave, but the quick closure prevented me from making that clearer: for Dr.K, diffs would show "did", "did fail", "did refuse", and "did"; For me, "did not", "did not fail", "did not refuse", "sort of did" (I did in his talk page deliver DrK's "liar" insult back to him - but to try to show how OTT it was for him to have used it in the first place and not because I was genuinely accusing him of lying). The questions were not content issues, they were about behavior, so I think they were valid and were not disruptive (though maybe their tone was a little brisk). I'm unhappy at the hasty way the case was closed, it gives rise to suspicions that it was because an administrator was involved, an administrator who appeared to be well on his way to justifying the case with the wording of his own reply. The case, as the questions show, was not about a content issue (the title I chose was just to make the title as neutral as possible) - it was about the obstructive and aggressive way an editor was behaving, a behavior that was preventing the content issue being progressed and solved. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:38, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Academy of Holy Angels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Replacements (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong with my edit?

What exactly is wrong with my edit on Christian Church article? Everything I wrote is a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kszorp (talk • contribs) 21:11, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kszorp: It's unsourced. And before you ask, your edits on islamophobia were original research and insertion of your own opinion. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I received an inaccurate critic from you of my edit that my edit was an opinion and not representing the source

My references are well documented and come from a highly reputable sources unlike the other contraceptive sources that some user has over generalized the North Carolina study and ignored the fact that contraceptive journals could potentially profit from publishing articles critical of CPC regardless of the article's validity. The data presented below is quantitative and directly taken from the source and not out of context nor my opinion nor original research. Please kindly remove your erroneous warnings from my account/edits because they are well documented and referenced.

These centers may disseminate information pertaining to the increased mental health problems after abortion in post-abortive women compared to non-post abortive mothers as scientifically documented in a study on the emotional wellbeing of 877,181 women, 163,831 of those who had abortions . Some articles have alleged that some CPCs have also been known to disseminate false medical information, usually about the supposed physical and mental health risks of abortion.

References

The problem here is that your source says nothing about what CPCs are doing—nothing at all. You have to provide a source connecting the practices of CPCs to this study, or to a similar study. Anything else is a violation of the WP:SYNTH guideline. Binksternet (talk) 02:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC).

The source refers to the information that CPC's are giving "supposed mental health risk of abortion" as is already referenced by others in the CPC wiki." Thus, clearly any information regarding mental health risk of abortion has been validated in the article from the British Journal of Psychology.