User talk:DocOfSoc

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Japandroids (talk | contribs) at 05:31, 25 January 2013 (→‎3RR). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Friday
17
May
00:26 UTC
It is approximately 4:26 PM where this user lives (Pacific Time). [refresh]


evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ucla90024#08_December_2010 You are mentioned. I think Grayshi is in the wrong.

reference

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&q=ethnoburb&hl=en Google Scholar]</ref> and "Google Books" lists 1360 referencesCite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

"the right person"

are you sure? When you click through, it goes to a football player in Colombia. tedder (talk) 19:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Positive. Hey, when it says Tedder, I sit up straight, get THREE sources and alphabetize! <Grin> Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 22:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So you are saying that Garcia's entry should stay even though there is no article for her? tedder (talk) 23:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yessir please. If you will set up a stub, ( I don't know how) I will write a nice little article. Did you check the sources? notable enough? Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 00:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't created article before? Do it in your userspace (User:DocOfSoc/Alexis Garcia (softball)) and I'll help you out, okay? tedder (talk) 01:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea Tedder! Thanks, that is really nice of busy you. I will contact you soon. I have TGIF-itis ;-) Have a great weekend! Namaste! ...DocOfSoc (talk) 03:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Nudge me if you are waiting for feedback or anything. Have a good weekend. tedder (talk) 04:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Practice

The Joyful Barnstar
For stepping in and causing this editor to feel on at least cloud seven. User:DocOfSoc 23:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still practicing: (talk page stalker)

Facepalm Facepalm

- - —'o=Joy=has given you a Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating! DocOfSoc (talk)

- -

|}

{{YGM|sig=DocOfSoc (talk)

More Practice:

DocOfSoc has given you a Girl Scout cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

and more practice for future useDocOfSoc (talk)

- Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

-

-

-

Hello, DocOfSoc. You have new messages at Your username's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[1]

[[2]]

The Good Friend Award
Hello there, just dropping by to say thanks for protecting my talkpage from IP attacks. Much appreciated :) DocOfSoc
Chocolate butterfly cake
The Barnstar of Integrity Contemplating use for Someone Special| All the best! DocOfSoc (talk)
Bright College Years
A recording of the the 2006 Yale Whiffenpoofs singing Bright College Years
Problems playing this file? See media help.

Pico Rivera, California

Hi there, what a mess the vandals have in the Pico Rivera, California article. After you fixed a large number of vandalism edits, I found a couple more and fixed them as well. There could be others, as I looked back to an edit on January 15, and alot more text seems to have changed since then. I'm not sure what, if any was changed for the better or what could posibly have been the work of vandals. When you get a chance, can you take a closer look and see. It's polsible we got all the vandalism, I'm just not 100% sure. Thanks. Cmr08 (talk) 02:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC) Thank YOU! Hey, we be a good team! ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 04:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

S-1 Edit

Ummm... why? There's been no recent activity, the whole thing about refactoring others' talk pages... and this would seem to be "poking the bear". You know I love ya always, but I must tell you I am confused about this one (and don't want to see you get in trouble). Sigh. Let me know what's up :> Doc talk 02:38, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This offensive remark should have been removed months ago. As it is by a proven Sockpuppet of SRQ"s, what is the problem? I have been really sick for some time and am trying to catch up. I have not been around much after being betrayed by someone I really trusted. It is denigrating and insulting. Does it not conform to the criteria that such material may be deleted immediately? — DocOfSoc • Talk • 02:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't unfortunately. It don't think it would meet RD3 (which is what most admins seem to cite when revdeleting something nowadays), or else it would have already been. You could ask an admin for revdeletion of the edit, but I doubt it would happen (not to discourage you from asking at all). The real problem is that it was at another user's page, and he reacted rather quickly and reverted you: plus it was an old edit. We've just got to let sleeping dogs lie and get on with editing. No one's going to go looking into that page for that: so just forget about it. Lots to do here, and focusing on that isn't necessary. Cheers :> Doc talk 03:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK Ok. I was mostly dead all day. Didn't ya miss me? I have been totally bereft. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 03:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still thinking. Isn't that item "Purely disruptive material that is of little or no relevance or merit to the project." Huh? — DocOfSoc • Talk • 03:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not enough for revdeletion, I'm pretty positive. Of course I missed you, but we only cross paths when things are "rocky" ;> I love CA (and have visited a few times), but I know not enough to write a blurb about any one town. Actually... I've been to Yreka - maybe I should write about that! That's a little north of your expertise, but if you ever go up to Crater Lake, fly into Redding and drive up. It's a beautiful trip! Cheers :> Doc talk 03:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have been to those places you mentioned many times, yes lovely. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 03:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I meant we don't edit the same articles so we don't see each other much. Cheer up! Send me an e-mail, will ya? Doc talk 03:32, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I should have looked a little at what's been posted before I posted mine below. ;) Cheer up, ok? Like I say below email me, I think we are both in the same kind of boat, feeling lousy.  :( Also, you should know by now that you can come to me to talk to about things so that you don't get so upset. Please, email me, I'm home now. --CrohnieGalTalk 14:09, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

Hi, just dropping in to say hello. Did you get my email? Please check and see if you did or not. It's been about a week I think. I just emailed you some personal stuff and was checking in on you to see how you are feeling. Let's take this to email ok? I hope you are feeling better. I am, but slowly, be well, --CrohnieGalTalk 14:01, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RESOURCE to work on: http://aerospacelegacyfoundation.com/page9.html


My sister died a year ago today. When your twin dies, an integral part of you is lost forever. You will find me at the largest cemetery in the United States with flowers and a twirley :-( — DocOfSoc • Talk • 12:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


(talk page stalker)

San Marino, California

Hi, I noticed that you reverted a couple of my edits to the notable people section. I gather that you want to add a somewhat in-depth description to each person, and I understand that, but right now it is making the section seem cluttered and somewhat unreadable. Having a basic description of the person with the link to their page (should a reader want to find out more) should suffice and is typically the norm for a city's notable residents page. I also added a couple more people to the list and removed a couple that did not have their own articles. Just trying to clean it up a bit, hope you understand. Thanks! Gordonhigh (talk) 07:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Molly Bee

My pleasure; you are most welcome! Thanks for noticing. RadioBroadcast (talk) 04:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:S1147744285 30032520 738.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:S1147744285 30032520 738.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Eeekster, (love your name)! As you may have surmised, I don't have a clue as to what I am doing. The upload is from a Sunday newspaper, LA Times. I cannot read the author/editor,will not zoom. Is it hopeless or jsut me?TY — DocOfSoc • Talk • 09:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Wikistalking) Here's what I'd do in a similar situation...find a similar picture (i.e. a screenshot of a page of a newspaper), assume that the licensing will be similar, copy the licensing template, make any alterations as needed to fit your picture, and paste it where the warning about no licensing. I think you will be OK not to include the original author of the article if use some kind of non-free low-res-screenshot-as-an-example licensing. FYI, I could be totally offbase, but I've done similar things in the past, and it's worked for me.

GSUSA

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting/Girl_Guiding_and_Girl_Scouting_task_force&curid=8368033&diff=417322552&oldid=417262719#Female_editors_on_Wikipedia Thanks, Chris--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just plain polite

The use of:

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard‎; 04:51 . . (+316) . . Ncmvocalist (talk | contribs) (→Proposal to revoke sanction no longer needed: WP:GS#Tony Abbott: when a total of 5 users commented in a "community decision", it would be wise to notify the 5 rather than leaving a post on an inactive article talk page)

"Borrowed" ;-)


Notifying users is what one does! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 12:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To all my beloved Admins please ignore; This is dedicated to the one who betrayed my trust and almost drove me away from Wiki. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can help

GIven your education and location, I was wondering... Trying to assess the contribution of "country" music ie Western Swing, to the dance originally known as Western Swing; now called West Coast Swing. There appears to be collective amnesia about the dance halls, etc that had thousands of people listening to Okie jazz. Am working with "Proud to be an Okie". Know any sources that deal with this? Sounds like a socialogy kind of thing! Steve Pastor (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, my maternal origins are pure Okie ;-) — DocOfSoc • Talk • 23:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From Muskogee? :> Doc talk 01:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From the glorious fly-over state of Misery...where else? LOL I miss you MORE! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 01:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Communication

Hi, sometimes I jump too quick, without thinking first. This was one of those times. Don't worry, there's no problem here, I'll try not to react so quick in the future. Thanks for the award, I'll add it to my user page. Cmr08 (talk) 23:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My stuff

DocOfSoc has given you a breath of Spring to promote WikiLove and Joy ;-)

— DocOfSoc • Talk • 23:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Note[reply]

G, Ani, Pasadena, Rosemead, Sierra Madre, Chinatown Los Angels?DocOfSoc (talk) 05:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

91770: [1] Rose [2] S&M [3] [4] sgv ethoburb [5] DocOfSoc (talk) For your listening enJoyment: DocOfSoc (talk)

Bright College Years

A recording of the the 2006 Yale Whiffenpoofs singing Bright College Years Problems listening to this file? See media help. I don't know how you knew I'd love that, but thank you! Also, thank you, see you're a hospice minister. Lost my Mom 10 years ago (and my Wife 5...) so thanks. Also I'm from Pomona (but I escaped)-small world!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk)


FYI

In Mac OS using the Australian, British, Canadian, German, Irish, Irish Extended, Italian, Pro Italian, Russian, U.S., or U.S. Extended keyboard layout, an en dash can be obtained by typing option-hyphen, while an em dash can be typed with option-shift-hyphen.

Read

http://www.amoeba.com/blog/2011/01/eric-s-blog/arcadia-the-san-gabriel-valley-s-community-of-homes-from-arkkkadia-to-arcasia.html GREAT info for a Blog. Still Taboo?? — DocOfSoc • Talk • 07:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vernon

Hello. I wonder if you can take a look at List_of_California_public_officials_charged_with_crimes#Vernon to see if it is up to date. The entry should be very brief (it is a list, after all). Thank you so much, and get plenty of sunshine today if you can. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:16, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With the advent of Bell, and the subsequent investigations, I see that Vernon and other cities are not up to date. Thank you, I was not aware of that page. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 21:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
.--Kumioko (talk) 02:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Letting you know that a request for comment has been made here for others to evaluate the situation at the Bruce Vilanch page. Hopefully, getting others involved will help. Lhb1239 (talk) 16:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Back soon

Thanks for your note. I'll still mostly away, but I'll be back soon.   Will Beback  talk  03:06, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back and at your service. Let me know if I can help anywhere.   Will Beback  talk  12:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation

I am willing to accept that there might be an issue with working with personal recollection, and would appreciate seeing where this is regulated in the Wiki rules. To say simply that I am wrong, however, is both rude and does not comply with this rule either, as you provide no documentation of what you say. Additionally, the text refers to "forty years ago", which would place it in the 1960's, the time of the Second Vatican Council. I wrote about the period prior to the Council.Daniel the Monk (talk) 19:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC) retrieved fro Daniel the Monk page:[reply]

Confirmation2

Personal research is a violation of Original research. Please read. Pre Vatican II children were routinely confirmed in junior high in the U.S. My own OR, I was confirmed on November 22, 1960, in 8th grade. I can't use that either because a recognized citation needs to be found to confirm (pun intended) this. PTL — DocOfSoc • Talk • 21:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I very politely said "("Personal Recollection" is a violation of "personal research" Besides that you are incorrect)"
I purposefully never said you were "wrong," a much harsher word. The Original research link is above and here again, so that you may read it; It is the documentation you asked for which I did indeed supply. "40 years ago" is Pre-Vatican II which opened in October 1962. I also recommend you read Good Faith.
Comments on articles belong on the article's discussion page, not on my personal talk page. You said "(Change age of reception prior to Vatican II from my own personal rellocation of the era) which has you re-locating rather than recollecting. Civility is part of Wikipedia's code of conduct, and is one of Wikipedia's five pillars. The civility policy is a standard of conduct that sets out how Wikipedia editors should interact. Stated simply, editors should always treat each other with "consideration and respect". I suggest you read those also. Jesus said the same thing 2000 years ago. As a fellow Catholic, I am dismayed at the tone of your missive. Peace be with you... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 23:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pasadena

On this, I believe you are mistaken. Amtrak took over in 1971, not 1791! Could you revert or explain your change? Cheers, —GFOLEY FOUR— 21:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I asked you to please be patient. The historical significance is kinda important (snort). Read the ref please and Could you kindly let me finish before you jump in? Namaste... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I get a bit passionate about the trains that ran behind my house as a child. I watched in horror when they took out the rails in the early 90s. So very much happened before 1971, I feel it is very important to include it. Nice to meet you, are you a train person too? Cheers.. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. =) I'm very much enjoy the Santa Fe Railway and the old main line (now BNSF) travels a few blocks away from me. I'm also planning to create the Pasadena depot article tonight, if you don't mind. —GFOLEY FOUR— 23:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific! Let me know if I can help. I love to research. I now live half a block from the tracks and a main intersection. The Bicentennial train went right by here, what a thrill! My friends who hear the whistle while on my phone insist it is going thru my living room LOL, I LOVE it! Glad we found "us" today! ;-) Have fun! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 23:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, at least your Santa Fe depot is still standing. (see here) Even the CB&Q depot was torn down. :( Though there is still Amtrak service! —GFOLEY FOUR— 01:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello again. I'm finally getting around to writing that article (progress here) and I have a few questions for you. =) 1) Is the depot on the NRHP? I saw one newspaper that said it was, but no other mentions of it. 2) Since you said you live the tracks, could you possibly sometime get a photo of the station building? Then, we could have a nice picture for the article! A lot of people have taken photos of the depot, but everyone on Flickr has it "all rights reserved". Cheers, —GFOLEY FOUR— 02:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Better

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. Abraham Lincoln — DocOfSoc • — DocOfSoc • Talk • 21:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Thanks for your note. Let me know if I miss that again. He seems to be a regular.

Good work.[3] You might aim to be a little more conservative in your writing. Encyclopedia's are supposed to be dull. ;) And be careful with the witty edit summaries. I used to try to be clever in my summaries but sometimes others took offensive at my attempts at humor, so now I stick with--you guessed it--boring entries.   Will Beback  talk  11:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I sense a theme. The marriage ended in 2000 after...   Will Beback  talk  11:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Self: Dana Plato

Question

Do we have a template that says "That is absolutely the stupidist comment I have ever seen on Wikipedia" ? — DocOfSoc • Talk • 00:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your messages!

Encouragement is always welcome. :-)

I always capitalize the race terms (it seems almost a respect thing, too, but let's not go too far down that path), but haven't been super careful of capitalizing others; I will now. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for seconding my barnstar! I didn't realize I was posting under death. hmmmm... :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 02:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MEDMOS

This guideline give information on ordering and formatting of medical articles. Cheers --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also please see WP:MEDRS with respect to referencing requirements. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support. Just had a quick glance at your changes. I am very passionate about this subject as I lost my twin sister recently and have a PILE of references. She was stage IV when diagnosed. If I had known the symptoms, perhaps it could have been caught earlier. I had no idea what those chronic symptoms meant. I am aiming for the article to save a life. The genetics are obviously a primary concern, I have four three sisters .The technical aspects are much appreciated. Thank you for all your time and effort. Be gentle, I still cry. This is so very important. Namaste... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 08:27, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to hear. Yes ovarian ca is a horrible disease and have seen many dye way before their time from it. With respect to Wikipedia it is used by 50-70% of physicians as well as over half of e patients. Thus there is a fine balance needed in writing style to communicate to both groups. I guess the biggest thing IMO is the importance of referencing to review articles. BTW if you are able to get this article to WP:Featured article status it ends up on the main page and thus you would increase the visibility of this condition. Let me know if you need help accessing references. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MEDMOS points out that "Wikipedia is written for the general reader. It is an encyclopaedia, not a comprehensive medical or pharmaceutical resource, nor a first-aid (how-to) manual. Although healthcare professionals and patients may find much of interest, they are not the target audience." Therefore no "balance" is needed. Physicians are not the target audience. Help in accessing references will be appreciated. Thank you — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We still strongly prefer reviews. You can ask others for clarification if you wish.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked repeatedly for you not to post about this article on my page. Another doctor, not listening with respect to another woman; That is how Ovarian cancer kills. RIP my dear sisters... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 06:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Symptoms of ovarian cancer

We already mention the symptoms once. We do not need to repeat them a second time. Also please use review articles. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AGAIN, please keep article issues off my talk page. I believe symptoms needed to be emphasized because BOTH women and doctors (how freudian!) are unaware or not giving the symptoms the attention they deserve and women are dying. Your use of the imperial "we" I find quite distressing. Because of the recency of my sister's death, and because her doctors did not listen to her symptoms for more than a year of regular visits, I am not up to engaging your edit war or your doctor cadre but instead will focus on an article for publication because women need the information and it is time that doctors take responsibility for NOT listening. I will continue to inform women of this deadly disease in whatever forum I can, and improve the article at a later time. When the symptoms "whisper" one needs to listen more closely! and BTW it's "die" not "dye" — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As a note this is not your talk page but one of many areas used for improving Wikipedia. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:52, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just dropping by...

Hi, we haven't talked in quite some time so I thought I'd drop in to say hello, Hello! :). I've not been too busy at Wikipedia due to RL problems that are quite serious. Want more details, email me. ;) I hope you are doing well. See you soon I'm sure, be well, --CrohnieGalTalk 12:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Berry

As a general rule, you can't use fair use images in biographies of living people. If there's to be a photo at all, it has to be a Creative Commons or public domain image — not a promotional one since promotional images are almost always copyrighted. You can use a copyrighted image for, say, someone who's dead, or a band that's broken up, because in those cases it's far less likely that a free image exists. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK Ten, Thanks! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:29, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shriver

Let's keep the Shriver-specific material in the Shriver article, and the Schwarzenegger-specific article in that article. OK?   Will Beback  talk  03:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Will. I had intended to changed the wording, ooops ;-) You can't keep all the issues separate because some are pertinent to both of them. Will keep the rest separate, OK? xo — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

US National Archives collaboration

 United States National Archives WikiProject
Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts.

There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 00:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editor gender

I don't know about (and don't plan to get involved with) Talk:Chinese enclaves in the San Gabriel Valley, but per your edit-summary question, the survey from late 2008/early 2009 preliminary results summary gives a 7:1 male:female ratio among editors. DMacks (talk) 04:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TY Macks, will read further. Appreciate you input. Namaste... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 04:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) DocOfSoc, it sure looked to me as though your edit removed one of Skookum1's posts to that talk page, so I reverted it. Can you please review to be sure that you are only adding new text and not removing existing material? Thanks! Franamax (talk) 04:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I further restored my own post in that thread that you removed back in February. I saw it at the time but just thought "mehh, whatever...". However it now appears that you may have a misunderstanding on how talk pages work. They are not malleable to what you wish they would say, they are a record of the proceedings here. If you feel that a personal attack or attacks have occurred, please present your opinion to an appropriate noticeboard for others to judge. If you are making similar selective removals elsewhere on Wikipedia, I would urge you to review them yourself, before other editors do the job for you. Regards! Franamax (talk) 05:35, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To DMacks that was interesting. Do you know any stats more recent, the one you post above is two years old? Has there been any more surveys and where do they do the surveys? I've been here since 2007, I am female, and I've never been part of a survey like this. Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know of any results or general surveys beyond that page. However, it does mention and link to a page about a 2011 survey. DMacks (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DOS, please take your concerns about the talk page to WP:WQA. It's a much better option than edit-warring on the page. tedder (talk) 14:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tedder, I am devastated to see you forgot that I am Doc not DOS (an ugly PC word). As I have been well trained by you, I was not engaging in an edit war I was righting a wrong and it took me a couple edits to get my tools (templates) in order. As always, I appreciate your watching my back. Namaste... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 00:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you!

Hope you're well! 1st ever WikiLove message, BTW ;> Doc talk 04:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Remember that kitties need lots of calmness when they are first brought home to be in your family. Calm has a lot of advantages in everything in life. Remember to keep calm and lots of love will always come your way!

CrohnieGalTalk 11:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

Items are to be placed in the lowest category. Yes, Oakland is on the bay, you say in your huffy edit summary, but all the Cities in Alameda County is a daughter of the Cities in the San Francisco Bay Area category, and all the cities in the Bay Area are happily in their county cats, save SF which is its own county. Please be more respectful and careful in your edits. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Please be more respectful and careful in your edits" on my talk page. Emphasis is in no way huffy and was not meant to be. I apologize if it looked that way to you.
Thank you for your enlightenment, Amigo. Peace! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 22:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Be nice

Please! Namaste... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 14:32, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELNO

Per this guideline Wikipedia is not a collection of external links. Thanks. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar . . .

The Barnstar of Diligence
For untiring thoroughness in updating the fast-moving City of Bell salary controversy article through its various stops, starts, and permutations. GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikihounding

Wikihounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor. Wikihounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia.

Many users track other users' edits, although usually for collegial or administrative purposes. This should always be done carefully, and with good cause, to avoid raising the suspicion that an editor's contributions are being followed to cause them distress, or out of revenge for a perceived slight. Correct use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles. In fact, such practices are recommended both for Recent changes patrol and WikiProject Spam. The contribution logs can be used in the dispute resolution process to gather evidence to be presented in requests for comment, mediation, WP:ANI, and arbitration cases.

The important component of wikihounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or to the project generally, for no overriding reason. If "following another user around" is accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks, or other disruptive behavior, it may become a very serious matter and could result in blocks and other editing restrictions.

(talk page stalker) What's all this then? Doc talk 04:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a dif to point to so that I can see what the above is in regards to? I know Doc 2 knows all of the above and probably could quote it by now with her eyes shut so what board is this leading to? <wink> Thanks, I just would like to take a peek. --CrohnieGalTalk 12:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I could LOL The last post was so egregious that my words were not printable LOL, hence the above.

More later — DocOfSoc • Talk • 17:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warning on multiple accounts

Hi. Please remember that editors are generally restricted to one account. Using multiple accounts, either to make it look like other editors are involved or to avoid scrutiny, is not allowed. Similarly, getting coworkers, friends, or other outside people to edit on your behalf is also frowned upon. Thanks. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 21:03, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see no one informed you about the sockpuppet investigation case that was opened. Well, it was in response to that. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 22:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my comments on the accusations about this user. I'm sorry but this is totally wrong for a reason to accuse another user of sock or meat puppetting. If you have any questions please make a note on my talk page and I will get back to you as soon as possible. I am not a real active editor at this time, mainly due to these kinds of behaviors that I am seeing now. Assume good faith is still policy and I don't see any good faith going on in this accusation nor the conclusions of this accusation. I was an informal mentor to Doc2 so I have a big interest in helping getting this resolved in a polite and quick fashion. Thank you for your time. --CrohnieGalTalk 13:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there Doc 2, I just talked to Doc James. May I give you a polite suggestion, please? Next time something like this happens please try to keep your temper and go and talk to the person who is questioning you about something like this. What I mean is this, if you would have went to Doc James and politely talked to him about his concerns he would have listened to you. Instead you lost your temper and you know how you losing that red head temper we are always talking to you about, usually doesn't help you and you know this. I think everything is ok now with everyone. I talked to a few people about this today and I think everyone understands everyone else. I think what happened is that there was one that was socking and probably a few meat puppets were added to try to force the link into the article, well from what I understand it was multiple articles. You just happened to be trying to put it into the one article and you got caught up in the net of trying to get rid of the trouble makers. It happens sometimes that others do wrong and someone will accidentally think you too are in the wrong. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say here because in my rush to get this to you before real life drags me away again, I know I'm saying this whole thing horribly. :) Sorry for that, always seem to be in a rush these days. You take care and I will try to respond to your email in a timely fashion. --CrohnieGalTalk 16:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is not temper my friend. it is hurt and frustration with a system that contributed to the death of my sister.20:15, 4 October 2011 (UTC) — DocOfSoc • Talk • 20:19, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A new medical resource

Please note that there is a new freely accessible medical resource, MedMerits (to which I'm a medical advisor) on neurologic disorders. A discussion on ELs to MedMerits and medical ELs in general is currently in progress ("Wikipedia and its relationship to the outside world"). Presto54 (talk) 06:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Please see: User_talk:Risker#Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/DocOfSoc Viriditas (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Full contents of WikiProject Film newsletter?

Hello, you are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Outreach as preferring the full contents of the latest WikiProject Film newsletter. There has been a transition in newsletter writing and distribution, so I wanted to ask if you still prefer the full contents (which may have been delivered with some inconsistency in the past) or if you are okay with a link to the newsletter page. Thanks, Erik (talk | contribs) 19:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to add American cinema task force under WikiProject United States

Greetings, I am a member of WikiProject United States, it was recently suggested that the American cinema task force of WikiProject Film which you are a member, might be inactive or semi active and it might be beneficial to include a joint task force for it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States, which Kumioko and me have added some of the projects like WikiProject American television and WikiProject United States Government. After reviewing the project it appears that there have not been any active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the task force talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 21:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2012

Your recent editing history at Montebello, California shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. I don't like to template the regulars, but you've been around long enough to know better than to edit war. Please stop, take a breath, go to the article's talk page, and discuss - don't edit war.(talk→ LesHB ←track) 04:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have not broken the 3RR rule. If you change it back again you will be in violation. If you would READ the sources instead of decimating the article we would both be better off. We have had this conversation before. I have no idea why you have taken unto yourself to occasionally go back to my edits and change them despite the properly sourced history, in more than one article. You leave enough time in between so it is not obvious or you would be reported. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 04:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(1) I edit articles because they need editing, not because you have edited them. If you look at my editing history, you'll see I have edited thousands of articles where there is no connection to you at all. (2) I have no idea what you're referring to when you saying I "would be reported". Reported for what? (talk→ LesHB ←track) 04:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppet! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 00:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3RRNB

Because of this reversion, you have been reported for edit warring and breaking the 3RR rule. You may see the report and comment here. (talk→ LesHB ←track) 05:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doc #2, you have been followed to more than four articles for quite some time. I think it started at 2011 Tucson Shooting, when you made an edit here, Lhb1239 took an interest in that article, appearing a few hours later[4] (there was no confrontation at the time, and this one's not provable stalking). But wasn't this "interaction" a great way to check up on your edits? A few days later the sudden "interest" in Montebello - duh. And popping in at Santa Anita Park in the middle of your edits - how lovely! (Gee, not a lot of editors have edited that article...) So in addition to the four mentioned in the report there are two more that can be directly added: List of people from Pasadena, California and Santa Anita Park. Doc talk 12:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self

Ichthus: January 2012


ICHTHUS

January 2012

User: Blue Marble Egg

DocOfSoc - Blue Marble Egg is a suspected sockpuppet of LHB1239 / SkagitRiver Queen for the following reasons: - Uses TW to revert, just like LHB1239 - Account created January 13th, around the time that LHB1239 was banned - Made edits to Grand Cayman Islands & Three Cups of Tea, both articles which were of interest to LHB1239 - Made far more reverts than new content, which is indicative of an experienced editor rather than a newbie.

Blue Pony Express (talk) 03:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC) TY! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 02:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the case is closed, and I'm getting all the ducks in a row, I just realized that I totally missed some truly classic behavior. Canvassing against you[5][6](calling you "he" was a nice touch, because knowing you were a "she" would be far more obvious ;P). If you ever suspect a new editor popping up and suddenly "lecturing" and reporting you to be really be an actually not new editor, please do not hesitate to contact me immediately. Cheers :> Doc talk 08:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting of Trayvon Martin

Hi Doc - I think you didn't mean to make this edit which reverted my edit about Zimmerman's employment, as the edit summary doesn't make sense for that one. I suspect you actually meant to revert this one about the quotes in Z's father's description of Z's ethnicity? I'm going to go out on a limb and fix mine, and you can check into the one about the quotes - I don;t know what is in there now. Let me know if I'm wrong and I'll apologize all over the page.... Cheers Tvoz/talk 08:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Size

Hi. First, I liked that your comment about Zimmerman-Martin relative size was balanced. Regarding Trayvon's size, it brought to mind a story that was in the news many years ago about a father and son that were out walking one night. The son was on leave after basic training in the army, was a couple of years older than Trayvon and exactly the same height and weight, 6'1" and 150 lbs. Their walk was interrupted when they were accosted by three muggers. The muggers got the living crap beat out of them. --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New medical organization

Hi

I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new multinational non-profit organization we're forming at m:Wikimedia Medicine. Even if you don't want to be actively involved, any ideas you may have about our structure and aims would be very welcome on the project's talk page.

Our purpose is to help improve the range and quality of free online medical content, and we'll be working with like-minded organizations, such as the World Health Organization, professional and scholarly societies, medical schools, governments and NGOs - including Translators Without Borders.

Hope to see you there! --Anthonyhcole (talk) 07:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Japanoid

If japandroid continues I recommend reporting him to WP:ANI or WP:BLPN--Jac16888 Talk 11:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Your recent editing history at Charles Karel Bouley shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Japandroids (talk • contribs) 04:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Exception to 3RR rule: Reverting obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding offensive language. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 04:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Charles Karel Bouley shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DocOfSoc&oldid=534778162"