User talk:Wtmitchell: Difference between revisions
Mark Miller (talk | contribs) |
→ahahhahahahahaha: new section |
||
| Line 709: | Line 709: | ||
:I've placed {{tl|cleanup}}, {{tl|wikify}}, and {{tl|expert}} tags in the article. hopefully someone with both Wikipedia editing experience and sone knowledge about the article topic will help out. -- [[User:Wtmitchell|Boracay Bill]] ([[User talk:Wtmitchell#top|talk]]) 06:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
:I've placed {{tl|cleanup}}, {{tl|wikify}}, and {{tl|expert}} tags in the article. hopefully someone with both Wikipedia editing experience and sone knowledge about the article topic will help out. -- [[User:Wtmitchell|Boracay Bill]] ([[User talk:Wtmitchell#top|talk]]) 06:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
:You could very easily have a point. Hopefully the tags placed by Boracay Bill help it get some unbiased expert input. However, continually vandalizing the article and the talk page will not help you get your point across. [[User:Turgan|Turgan]] <sup>[[User talk:Turgan|Talk]]</sup> 06:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
:You could very easily have a point. Hopefully the tags placed by Boracay Bill help it get some unbiased expert input. However, continually vandalizing the article and the talk page will not help you get your point across. [[User:Turgan|Turgan]] <sup>[[User talk:Turgan|Talk]]</sup> 06:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
== ahahhahahahahaha == |
|||
lol hahahahahahahahahhahahah |
|||
Revision as of 04:46, 24 April 2009
Hi.
If I left a message on your user talk page, you can answer there since I do keep such pages on watch for a while.
One way to contact me is to edit this page and leave a message here. Please sign your messages with four tilde characters, like this: ~~~~
I will generally respond on this page unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you leave me a message.
TV Broadcast restrictions on Commons images
An anon user added that restriction to tons of Philippine-related images on Commons, seemingly in response to the copyright infringement actions done by ABS-CBN and other networks that was recently discussed in the Tambayan. TheCoffee had noticed those additions too and mentioned it at the same Tambayan thread. I think someone with rollback rights needs to undo those additions at the Commons. --seav (talk) 09:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Shortened footnotes
Hey, SallyScott. I recall from not too long ago that you put together a very nice sub-page under WP:CITE with info on this. Now I see that WP:CITESHORT doesn't mention that and doesn't contain anywhere near the information which used to be presented on that sub-page. What happened? -- Boracay Bill (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Bill. There's a link to subpage Wikipedia:Citing_sources/Further_considerations#Wikilinks_to_full_references in "Shortened footnotes" section. But I think you may be referring to subpage Wikipedia:Citing_sources/Example_edits_for_different_methods, which is now only referred to in the "See also" section.
- There's a case for referring to /Example edits for different methods in WP:CITE's body text, both in the "Shortened footnotes" section and in the "Citation templates and tools" section, as the idea was not only to further illustrate the different wikilinking methods, but also to allow for comparison of footnote references using citation templates and footnote references written freehand.
- I think I'll add such references back in on that basis then. Cheers. --SallyScot (talk) 12:49, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 20:55, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
The move of "Katagalugan" to "Republic of Biak-na-Bato"
The page Katagalugan was moved to Republic of Biak-na-Bato to conform with Wikipedia's naming convention. However the "Republic of Biak-na-Bato" was one established by members of the Katipunan in 1897. http://filipino.biz.ph/history/biak.html
Meanwhile, the article deals with Macario Sacay's "Republika ng Katagalugan", which started in 1902.
May I suggest moving it to "Tagalog Republic" instead? 71.116.123.192 (talk) 05:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- I like it. Admin powers are needed to do that move, though, and I'm not an administrator. I've put it up for discussion here. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 08:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 01:15, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Your edit of the Helecopter image caption on the Viet Nam War page
- Bill, I think the image is of a South Vietnamese Air Force 217th Helicopter Squadron chopper. See http://vnaf.net/photos/huey/uh1h_217_1.html Note the stars on the tail of the bw photo vs the red tail with yellow stars of the color photo. Also US Army aircraft had United States Army in black letters on the sides. For some reason I can not edit the caption. Meyerj (talk) 15:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Correction, I can change it nowMeyerj (talk) 17:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- OK. Thanks for the correction. It clearly was not a U.S. Air Force Huey, as it was captioned when I changed the caption. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Correction, I can change it nowMeyerj (talk) 17:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Bill, I think the image is of a South Vietnamese Air Force 217th Helicopter Squadron chopper. See http://vnaf.net/photos/huey/uh1h_217_1.html Note the stars on the tail of the bw photo vs the red tail with yellow stars of the color photo. Also US Army aircraft had United States Army in black letters on the sides. For some reason I can not edit the caption. Meyerj (talk) 15:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 05:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)
Citation template
Hi! I've been looking at the history of {{Template:Citation}}, realizing that you are one of the contributors. This template was imported to the spanish wikipedia. You can find it at es:Plantilla:Citación. Unfortunately, we have a problem with it, because it leaves a double line between citations, as you can see in one example at the talk page of this template. We could never thank you enough if you could have a quick look at it and fix it (if possible). Please, I would be grateful if you could anser me at the spanish wikipedia es:Usuario Discusión:Gustavocarra. Thanks again in advance.Gustavocarra (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, it looks like I have been able to fix it by myself. Thanks anyway.Gustavocarra (talk) 16:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 5 | 31 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 22:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Help needed: Sitakunda Upazila
The article failed an FAC mostly because of irregularities in citation format. I found you at the ciitation cleanup project, and I am really hoping that you can help the article. Would you consider helping it, please? Aditya(talk • contribs) 02:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've done the citation regularization work. It needs to be proof-read. I left at least one new tag and at least one inline comment in the article. Those should show up in the diffs between versions if you proof-read my changes from them. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 07:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Spratly Islands
Thanks for double checking my references and putting in the fixes. -Knowl -<(I am questing for Knowledge!) (talk) 04:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Republic of Biak-na-Bato
|
On February 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Republic of Biak-na-Bato, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Dravecky (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 08:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
White Man's Burden/ Poem Texts
Hello. I was interested by your revert of the poem removal on the White Man's Burden article. I am working with poetry project to help fine-tune b-class articles for GAR, and this particular article was on my list. The reason I removed the poem text is because it is not a short poem, and it is on wikisource. Three other editors have suggested the same action with no dissent on the talk page, so it seemed logical that the action be made. If this article were to go under review, it would likely fail based on the fact that the poem's text were present alone. If you have any opinions on the matter, I would love to hear your reasoning on either the article's talk or my own. I do appreciate your imput. Mrathel (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hi. I wasn't aware of the talk page discussion. I see from the talk page that it took place back in Feb and Sep of 2008, and that page may not have been on my watchlist then. If I had been a participant in the discussion, I would probably have favored removal of the text because, from what I've seen, the main impact of requoting the text in the article has been to attract vandals. My problem with what looked to me like an out-of-the-blue removal of the text here was the edit summary, "removed poem text". As I said in the edit summary for my reversion of your removal, "I don't have strong opinions about this, but this unilateral change seems a bit high-handed". You have now explained that the removal wasn't unilateral. Please note the following from Help:Edit_summary:
In addition to a summary of the change itself, the summary field may also contain an explanation of the change; note that if the reason for an edit is not clear, it is more likely to be reverted, especially in the case that some text is deleted. To give a longer explanation, use the Talk page and put in the edit summary "see Talk".
- -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Translations at WP:NOR
FYI, In the Talk page section WT:NOR#Translations_of_non-english_sources, I suggested a change to your recent addition at WP:NOR regarding translations . --Bob K31416 (talk) 15:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification. WP:Consensus will work it out. You may or may not be interested in taking a look at the not-really-related discussion going on at Talk:Libingan ng mga Bayani#Requested move. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 00:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 20:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
RE: this edit
According to the entry on Wiktionary "hung" is used when the subject is performing the action; "hanged" is used in the passive sense, when the subject is subjected to the action, rather than performing it. The usage you suggest, Wiktionary points out, is not universally accepted (see the usage notes), and "hung" was entirely appropriate in reinforcing the idea that the men did this to themselves. I'm not gung-ho about changing it; I just wanted you to know this wasn't as cut-and-dry as you seemed to suggest. Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry to chime in, but I just happened to see this debate, and I loved it:) . Hanged is the correct term gramatically, but when one does it to himself...well that is just a case where grammar becomes interesting. I would still probably prefer hanged, but both sides have quite a point. Mrathel (talk) 16:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed! English is one of those languages where colloquial usage can overpower "established" rules of grammar to the point that they can lose real meaning with the vast majority of speakers. That's not to say that it's a good thing, but when words' alternative usages make it into dictionaries, it's hard to resist. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Paris Peace Accords article
Technical problem on [12] is now fixed. I restored my addition. Thank you for pointing the problem out. Armando Navarro (talk • contribs) 03:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- I notice that reference [12] in the edited article still says, "... p.198. ...", with a clickable link which still navigates to page 246 in the book preview. Also, there seem to be some square-bracket problems because the square-bracker is a wikitext markup character—e.g., [[[Richard Nixon]]], [KC Johnson Robert|"KC" Johnson], [[[Lyndon B. Johnson|Johnson]]], and [[Eisenhower]’s chief of staff] were probably meant to render respectively as something like (Richard Nixon), Robert "KC" Johnson, (Johnson), and (Eisenhower’s chief of staff). There are other instances of a square-bracket being used to parenthesize things, and it would probably better overall to adopt a consistent convention of using round-parens as parenthesizing punctuation. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Note [12] and most square-bracket problems now seem to be resolved. One problem is that there are square-brackets in one of the sources cited (Robert "KC" Johnson) - any input on the conflict between respecting original source material and text convention consistency is welcome. Thanks again. Armando Navarro (talk) 02:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. I mentioned that above and suggested a workaround solution (using round-parens as parenthesizing punctuation). -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
NPOV thingee
thank you for your very well-stated response, here: Wikipedia_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#Neutral.3F. I was really wrestling with the urge to say "because unborn children don't read wikipedia", which just would have gotten me in trouble. my (arguably bad) sense of humor is going to be the death of me yet, I swear. 
--Ludwigs2 00:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Spratly Islands
Thanks for helping contribute to the Spratly Islands page! Its my personal pet project and I'm happy you took the time to improve the citation section. -Knowl -<(I am questing for Knowledge!) (talk) 22:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
- News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
- Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Your request for rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback may be removed at any time.
If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Tiptoety talk 02:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
David Holdsworth
He did appear on an episode of Through the Keyhole
Why delete —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.254.9 (talk) 05:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hi. I was blitzing through changes with WP:Huggle and admittedly didn't consider this too much before doing the reversion. I've taken a second look, and I think I would still revert it, based on unencyclopedic tone and little or no relevance to the rest of the article. I'm not familiar with Through the Keyhole, but I took a quick look and saw: [1], [2], [3]. If you feel that this info belongs in the article, I won't argue about it. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 05:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
DL Camelopardalis
Perhaps you'd like to read Bayer designation to figure out WHY DL Camelopardalis is NOT a Bayer designation? 76.66.201.179 (talk) 08:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- If you want, you can clean up User:CarloscomB (an indefinitely blocked user) that created that page, since he has problems with MOS:HEAD, and apparently being from Brazil, needs copyediting for grammar and spelling. Or you can just revert to the bad version, as you have already done. 76.66.201.179 (talk) 08:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting problems on that revert. As you've no doubt concluded, I am not an expert in the field of astronomy. That article was among a bunch of recent changes I looked at which WP:Huggle flagged as suspicious. As you've pointed out, the reversion on that particular article was an error on my part. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:42, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
P-A war
I don't think content should be translated from there. It's tagged for cleanup and unsourced. It's not an FA now and it's not clear if it ever was one. Also, the Tagalog wikipedia is pretty low-quality as a general matter. Our article should be expanded using reliable sources, not that wiki article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
- No argument. I can't find right now what article you're talking about (doesn't seem to be P-A War), but I do recall commenting somewhere following on what I took to be a suggestion that the Tagalog ikipedia had a better article than the English one that perhaps the content should be merged. WP:V should always be followed, of course. If the content in the Tagalog Wikipedia is unsourced, merging it with a well-sourced English Wikipedia article might do more damage than good. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Marenach
I am Marenach. Je suis Marenach.--Marenach (talk) 03:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Did you and I just collide in the Beltrán de Cetina article? I reverted what looked like vandalism, using WP:Huggle, and now I see that the text in the article is oinfused. checking the history, I see that i reverted one in a long series of edits. Perhaps this was not vandalism and I disturbed you in the middle of some changes. If that is the case, I apologize. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey bill. Long time no see.
you got me last night too... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enterore (talk • contribs) 04:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Issei Sagawa
Sorry, I tried to add my source for my recent additions but was unable to reiterate the format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.23.131 (talk) 05:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Take a look at WP:FOOT. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 05:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
March 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Tony Hawk, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. You put "If you poop on his elbow, he rubs it on his chin. This then causes a brisk breeze which carries the warm smell of shitty poopy ballsacky shit sacks to me." ... XTBoris say something ! 09:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oops. That would have been this edit, which was a vandalism reversion. That edit, while it did revert one vandalous edit, also inadvertantly restored some past vandalism from a previous edit. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Inappropriate rollback
HI I don't think this edit [4] was appropriate. Remember that rollback is only for vandalism. This user was in the process of creating a new article, and the user's edits (even if you did not agree they were necessary) were certainly not vandalism. Remember also, that inappropriate use of rollback can result in the removal of the priviledge. Aleta Sing 14:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, and thanks. I was going through filtered edits with WP:Huggle, and mistook the snippet of this preceeding edit which Huggle showed me as vandalism -- probably because of the sexual terminology in the inserted text coupled with the absence of an edit summary. I don't make mistakes like that that often, but it does happen. When I do catch myself making such mistakes, I'll normally self-revert the edit and, if a warning was issued, edit the talk page of the user involved to replace the warning with a message about the revert and self-revert. In this particular case, I apparently failed to recognize my error. Apologies. I'll put a message about this on User talk:Tgurlcandi. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009
— 16 March 2009
- News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
boo hoo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.111.11.41 (talk) 06:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Lisa Pin-Up
The so-called vandalism of this article is without discussion and extensive, but in my view this article needs massive reworking. There is no need to include every single song she's ever released, especially not if a good portion of them haven't gained notability through the charts or reviewers. Also the portions that aren't straight song listings reads precisely as an advert for her. If you have familiarity with the subject I'd recommend you start with some trimming, but otherwise I'll get to work on it myself later.--Human.v2.0 (talk) 12:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I would help if I could, but I'm afraid that I know nothing about the article topic. I happened to nitice that a vandal had removed the References section and material following it from the article, causing problems. I reported that as vandalism and restored the material which had been removed. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 22:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Palaris Revolt, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.pangasinan.gov.ph/towns/palaris.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Palaris Revolt
A tag has been placed on Palaris Revolt requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 03:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note The problematic content of the subject article came from Philippine revolts against Spain# Palaris Revolt (1762-1765). I converted that content into a standalone article, where it was quickly tagged for speedy deletion for reason of apparent copyvio. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
: 23 March 2009
- From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
- Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
- News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Inaugural Holder of the President of the Philippines
Hi, the inaugural holder of the President of the Philippines should be Emilio Aguinaldo. The Philippine government consider him to be the first president. It is taught in school and universities that he is the first president and rightful inaugural holder of the president of the Philippines. It is inappropriate to disregard the 10 presidents before Corazon Aquino. Even the presidents in the Philippines are under diifferent constitutions, the line of the presidents is continuous. Example under the Malolos Consititution: Aguinaldo; under the 1935 constitution: Quezon, Osmeña, Roxas, Quirino, Magsaysay, Garcia, Macapagal and Marcos; under the 1943 constitution (Japanese occupation) Laurel; 1987 constitution: Aquino, Ramos, Estrada and Arroyo. So the Philippines honors Aguinaldo as its first president, therefore it's rightful inaugural holder.- Philippinepresidency (talk) 10:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
: 30 March 2009
- From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
- Special report: Community weighs license update
- News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
idk
u remember me. I wuz the one who u kicked off for vandalizimon my last account, enterorespAko. then i wuz talking to u. I told the story of amin slyvake and how he was the first person to pee off a hot air balloon. it was accually a true story except for the antlantis part... and all the stuff about falling down the mountain for 4 in a half hours... yeah and pretty much everything after that about marrying Brad pitt in New york city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enterore (talk • contribs) 23:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
: 6 April 2009
- Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
- News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
- WikiProject report: WikiProject China
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
: 13 April 2009
- License update: Licensing vote begins
- News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
- Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 17:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
i helped with dwight howard earlier so can i get a thank you??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oballers4life (talk • contribs) 01:32, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
You reverted my edits?
For what, possible reason? Among the things you decided needed to stay in the article was the patently untrue claim that Sam's last line in the series was "Home sweet home" when it was "Thank you, Mr. President." If you have an issue with an edit, perhaps you should take it to discussion before reverting it. --76.90.29.62 (talk) 06:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
im sorry for doing that page but i dont think wiki. is a very useful site, cause people like me can get on and change the actually information, and people that are doing projects need real information to do there projectd. so i think that you should set up accounts to make sure that people dont change it. sencerly, regann. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.108.38.149 (talk) 06:59, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
possessive of Apophis
In Wikipedia, for a word ending in one s, either style is acceptable . Saros136 (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Oops, you're right. My check of WP:MOS#Possessives on this was too rushed. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 21:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
lightning hopkins and rhcp
the sentence about frusciante is unconstructive! it is an artifact of bias at this particular time of writing that anyone should think that we should be impressed that an overall historically minor musician might have been influenced by an historically major one! my suggestion is for the frusciante reference to be removed, because it is disrepectful to the broader influence of hopkins, the blues, rock, etc! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.15.176 (talk) 02:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
also:
how did you catch that so quickly? are you just constantly at your computer monitoring, or is there an automated system of text analysis.
if you're constantly checking: ludicrous! how do you do it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.15.176 (talk) 02:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: Message to me
Sorry Bill, but none of the external links on the coboconk page were my doing. I added The Patty House as a landmark, which it most certainly is, but I did not add any external links.
- 70.53.46.85 (talk) 03:17, 19 April 2009 (UTC) (user:Floydian)
- Hmmmm.... I'm doing vandalism patrol with WP:Huggle. I found the revert at issue, and recall reverting that thinking that it smelled like an advertisement (also, I notice now, a spelling error; but that wouldn't have prompted me to revert if I had noticed it at the time). Huggle has a drop-down list of reversion reasons, and I picked the entry "spam" off that list. It looks like Huggle's canned messages for the reversion reasons might not match up with the labels on the list. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Your edit revision
My post that you removed was not unconstructive, rather it needed specification. I am not familar with military terminology but bombardier can mean both a pilot and an archaic term for an infantry man. My post, that you removed was constructive (albeit not totally correct), Alexander Oppenheim was a bombardier, that having a significant, formative impact on him leaving research and the proceedings of his life thereafter. I quote directly from The Gaurdian, "Many were saddened that so brilliant and congenial a colleague should apparently divorce himself from "mainstream" research in number theory, particularly when world events swept him into the Singapore Reserve Army with the rank of lance-bombardier. In 1942, although his wife and young daughter escaped, he was captured by the Japanese." I have included the link below. My specialty is biographies and if you look at my editing history, I provided numerous constructive and relevant information to that particular page, I am just not familiar with military terminology. Instead of reverting my edit, you could have been constructive yourself and simply done research and changed the fact to its more appropriate technical title.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Mitchell M.A., M.S.L.S.
University of Chicago Library
Specialist in Law and Biography
Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/obituary-sir-alexander-oppenheim-1289007.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.150.233 (talk) 04:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I have edited the article to restore the previously removed material, supported by a citation of this supporting source. Thanks also for contributing to wikipedia. I encourage you to register a username, which would allow communication on a personal talk page such as this one; communication on the anonymous IP-numbered talk page is typically unreliable, as such talkpages are typically shared among a number of individuals. Cheers. Boracay Bill (talk) 08:10, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.56.30 (talk) 05:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- I reverted this vandalous, edit. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 06:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Women in Engineering
Can you please take a little time and read the discussion page and NOT auto-reverting edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.98.178 (talk) 06:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- It looks like you're right. Apologies. I was doing vandal patrol with WP:Huggle, and apparently going too fast. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 07:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi, I've reverted your recent edit to Conscription. Please take a look at it, were you tring to do something else? Thanks - Kingpin13 (talk) 07:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've fixed it. As I recall (perhaps mistakenly), that was a rollback I did with WP:Twinkle. In any case, it clearly got confused somehow—probably my fault, I've done a lot of editing today and I recalled that I rushed this one along as I was headed out the door. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 10:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Change to Sleep deprivation lead
I am actualy an established editor on Wikipedia. However I discovered quickly that editing the more controversial articles is better to be done with just my IP. That way my Userpage does not get vandlised further. LOL!
Thank you for being very protective against vandals, and thank you for letting the referenced change stand. I was directed to the page from an off site message board that was using the page to make a political point about torture. I immediately noticed the lead was a little slanted. OK that's just my own POV....but there was no reference and it appeared that the lead lacked the true definition of an act of depriving something. It came across as a political POV. I believe this compromise keeps the article factual and still allows the lead to grow with additional information.--69.62.180.178 (talk) 03:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- I made the change during vandalism patrol, so it didn't get too much thought at the time. The change reverted your having changed the lead sentence to read
Sleep deprivation is the act of depriving someone of the necessary amount of R. E. M. sleep. This may occur as a result of sleep disorders, active choice or deliberate inducement.
- back to its previous version reading
Sleep deprivation is a general lack of the necessary amount of sleep. This may occur as a result of sleep disorders, active choice or deliberate inducement such as in interrogation or for torture.
- My thought at the time was that limiting the definition to only "the act of ..." was too limiting, and "a general lack of ...", along with "may occur as a result of" was probably better. I see that the lead sentence now reads
Sleep deprivation is the partial or near partial act of depriving the needed amount of R.E.M. sleep to an individual or organism. [1]
- Citing
{{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)
.
- I took a look at the cited source (which I would have cited it with only one isbn and with some additional links, something like[1]).
- I see that source cited actually says, on page 1, "The deprivation of sleep is the partial or near-complete removal of sleep in an organism." Several sentences later, on page 2, it says, "... Sleep deprivation may be sleep-state specific, where the subject may be specifically deprived of NREM or REM sleep, or sleep stage specific, where the subject may be deprived of any of the stages of NREM sleep. ...". It looks to me as if the cited supporting source does not support the assertion in support of which it is cited. Since I only came on this article in passing and it is not in one of my interest areas, I'll leave it to you and the other editor more concerned about this article than I to work it out. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Well....far be it for me to argue with you but, the over all statement is supported by the citation. The word "Deprivation" is not a general lack of....it is an act of keeping something from....I worded the sentence as short and simply as possible but I believe it is still within the explanation used in Kushida's book.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Nazeer Naji
The page on Nazeer Naji has been edited incorrectly and is based on a roumer spread by Pakistan Taliban against a well liked seasoned pakistani Journalist. The so called Ahmad Noorani is a fanatic cleric and he is instrumental in starting this roumer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.180.8.117 (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- I've placed {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, and {{expert}} tags in the article. hopefully someone with both Wikipedia editing experience and sone knowledge about the article topic will help out. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 06:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- You could very easily have a point. Hopefully the tags placed by Boracay Bill help it get some unbiased expert input. However, continually vandalizing the article and the talk page will not help you get your point across. Turgan Talk 06:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
ahahhahahahahaha
lol hahahahahahahahahhahahah