User talk:Aspening

Click here to start a new discussion.

Untitled comment from Marcia Parker SF (title retroactively added)

Hi Aspening. Saw your speedy deletion note. I can add a link to her staff bio on our page. Would that do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcia Parker SF (talk • contribs) 17:13, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Which speedy deletion note are you talking about? Can you give me a link? Aspening (talk) 17:17, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I removed Important Misleading Information but you Restored it!

Hello there, I have removed one paragraph from Price SambhajiRaje's Marriage History as it was totally Wrong and Misleading. He was Honest prince of Swarajya Kingdom, ATrue Patriot who never trait against his father and kingdom. Also he never had touched any drinks orany other women with bad intentions. He was very strict. And he considered at other womens as her mother, so I Deleted that Wrong part written in paragraph about sensual pleasure etc. For references You can watch Serial/ Read Chawa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adityanraje123 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, you were removing cited information without a proper counter-source. Also, just because something is unflattering doesn't mean it should be removed. See WP:DONTLIKEIT. Aspening (talk) 17:19, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages

I see you recently accepted a pending change to July 7. I looked for a source for this date of birth in the DJ Manian and it was unsupported by any source there either.

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.

Please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know... I don't think a lot of PC reviewers are aware of this at all, and date pages are often PC-protected. I'll make sure to let people who edit date pages know about this if I reject their edits. I'll also check articles for inline citations before accepting pending changes on date pages. Aspening (talk) 21:14, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

My Reason for Removing Content

I removed content from the paraphilias page because being attracted to trans men and/or trans women is now considered a normal sexual orientation by the scientific community, and so neither should be listed as a paraphilia. I will be more specific about my reasons next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratsarecool3 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Untitled comment from Chg1990 (title retroactively added)

I did not remove or do any disruptive editing... If I edited something I should not have edited, show me where and I won't do it again. My apologies, won't happen again. Chg1990 (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

I noticed you were removing substantial amounts of content without adequately explaining why. Next time, please add an edit summary. Aspening (talk) 15:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

ICP edit revert

Hi Aspening. Thank you for taking the time to review my recent addition to the Iterative closest point article. I am one of the main developers of the software library I linked to and have disclosed my conflict of interest in my user page. The library in question is the work of the PRG group at UMD; please see our pending draft and technical report. Our open source contribution (which is steadily gaining attention) has a significant educational value, as it implements many common and reference algorithms, including many variants of the one the edited article is about. Therefore, we believe it appropriately fits the (existing) "Implementations" section of the ICP article. We kindly request that you reconsider the "promotional" tag (we would not (need to) use Wikipedia to draw attention); this is about a relevant OSS contribution, under a non-restricting license, by a university research lab. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzampog (talk • contribs) 17:21, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Kzampog, please read WP:NOTLINK and WP:ELMIN. There is no need for more external links than are necessary. It also appears that cilantro might not meet WP:NSOFT. Aspening (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for providing specific clarifications on your policies. However, since there already exist externally linked entries of unproven notability in the section of interest, it is still not very clear to me how the decision boundary is decided. In any case, thank you again for your feedback and review work.

Untitled comment from Taypop3 (title retroactively added)

Hello, I noticed you reverted my edit on Niykee Heaton's page. I thought it was constructive and I was just wondering what you saw wrong with it, thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taypop3 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

What you put looked like original research to me, as well as biased content. Aspening (talk) 02:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

My Edit to American Renaissance Magazine

Good day to you.

You have taken away my recent changes to American Renaissance Magazine on the grounds that they were biased. I have studied for many hours in the field of Jarred Taylor and American Renaissance and I find the preexisting information to be biased itself. To put it it its most simple terms, American Renaissance is a magazine for the identity of white people and has a goal of protecting white and European interests. It is not "racist" and i would appreaciate it if the changes I made were reinstalled.

Thank you and God Bless,

Rowland III — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.93.73 (talk) 03:06, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Calling critics ignorant and saying their claims have no merit is introducing obvious bias into the article. Referring to white supremacy as "white identity" is also giving undue weight to a fringe theory. Aspening (talk) 03:10, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Editing of Dr. Majid Naini page

Dear Sir: Peace & Greetings Universal Vision & Research started this page in honor of Dr. Naini who travels the world to promote peace, love, and understanding among all. I noticed that you tried to revert some of the posted material. It is very unfortunate that someone using Tashfeen 184 and some other accounts has spent time vandalizing this page with a distorted picture of Dr. Naini and other incorrect and insulting text. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me since I am Dr. Naini's assistant and am trying to correct the texts. My only guess is that this person who is vandalizing the page is anti-love and peace and that is the reason he is doing this. All of the information we have written can be verified with references. Of course there may be some minor errors since we have had to correct the information so many times. Thank you so much for your help. Laura Universalvision (talk) 03:32, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Dick Durbin

Hello. You wrote you changed my one-word-addition to Durbin's wiki-page because what I wrote "seemed less than neutral to me," because I added the word "nominal" in describing Durbin's faith. I don't understand how you can say that; the very same article goes into great detail about how the Catholic Church hierarchy is banning Durbin from participating in the Sacrament of Communion for his non-Catholic stance on the political issue of abortion. How can you claim you are neutral but your subjective feelings of what I wrote (you said you felt what I wrote "seemed less than neutral to me"), and subsequent removal of that word "nominal", clearly lean towards non-neutrality based upon the very facts of the issue and your very own article. My addition of the word "nominal" is a fact-based assertion; you can't get more neutral than the truth.