User talk:Beyond My Ken

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
It is The Reader that we should consider on each and every edit we make to Wikipedia.
MOS is not mandatory
(see User:Ritchie333/MOS for Dummies)
     A HORSE
(Life is too short!)
Undertow seal.png

Articles that need serious visual work[edit]

Reminder: to work on[edit]


I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that you are banned from posting comments on my talk page, unless, of course, you are required to by Wikipedia policy. If you are required to post a notice on my talk page, please clearly indicate in the edit summary what policy you are doing so under. Any other posted comments will be deleted without being read.

Please note that this ban also applies to pinging me. Thanks. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 18:41, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hayek79: I acknowledge receipt of this message, which I read after I had posted a comment on your L.R. Wormwood talk page. You are reminded that warnings, advice and sanctions attach to the person doing the editing, and not to the account, so that you cannot avoid them by creating a new account, they remain pertinent and in effect. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:52, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


I'm not your enemy, and I fully recognize that you are a competent and experienced editor. Please extend to me the same courtesy. Grayfell (talk) 04:23, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

@Grayfell: My sincere apologies about that. I'm a bit cranky because, with the snowstorm expected here tomorrow, and her office closed tomorrow, my wife, who is usally asleep by this time, is streaming a movie, which makes my internet access slow down to a crawl. Everything takes forever to get done, which is really, really annoying (especially when my access isn't all that fast to begin with). You were the unfortunate outlet for my (totally unjustified) outburst, for which I once again apologize. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:39, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Okay. I hear you. I've certainly been guilty of much worse, unfortunately. No worries. Stay safe, warm, and dry. Grayfell (talk) 04:45, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your gracious acceptance. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:00, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:03, 14 March 2017 (UTC)


Just a quick note, I have mentioned a lengthy quotation of yours at Mlpearc, edit warring and communication style; I assume you feel the same now as you did in 2010. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:13, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's very much still the case. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Dawkins Divorce[edit]

Thanks for the heads up. I will add a source that says Dawkins was divorced, not just 'separated'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Korvex (talkcontribs) 01:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Request to overturn administrator's decision". Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:10, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Commented. Also, because the vote is very clearly lop-sided, I made a bold move of the article to the "conspiracy theory" name, for which I will probably be castigated, and which could well be undone by someone who has more appreciation for following rules then they have for common sense. I did not close the RM, however, since I !voted in it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:44, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Soka Gakkai page links[edit]

On the SG talk page I asked for a dialogue on the justification for posting a link to the fired staff video. It wasn't a matter of copyrights, but seeking the opinion of folks who were fired seems to bring their credibility into question. Might they have a grudge? We don't know the story behind the scenes, but if their voices can be heard, what about videos of satisfied members? Rather than posting and removing, I would like to know how the views of disgruntled former workers adds to the mix. Stgrlee16 (talk) 18:50, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Julius Tannen SitR.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Julius Tannen SitR.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:52, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Commissioners' Plan of 1811[edit]

Without the parentheses, it's not too clear what the dashed clause is supposed to modify, and the whole thing is unnecessarily confusing... AnonMoos (talk) 23:42, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't think so, the dashed-off section is precisely equivalent to the parenthetical one -- in fact, it is a parenthetical clause, albeit without parenthesis. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Downtown reversion[edit]

Hi there, I really don't have a dog in the Downtown fight, so I won't push back on that second reversion. If you have a moment though, I'd appreciate any insight you might have into why you considered my edit nonconstructive. I wouldn't have thought my changes (a few typos and reorganizing a list) would be controversial or anything but a wee improvement to the article. However, since I mostly keep to the minor-typo-tweaking side of things, I don't always grasp the finer points of editorial etiquette. Anything you could share would, I'm sure, be helpful. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 04:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

I restored the "then/than" and later the caption, so the issue was the reorganization of the list, which I did not find helpful. If it was meant to be alphabetical, "Center City, Philadelphia" should be alphabetized under "P" and not under "C"; and the columns were not balanced - if you're changing content, the presentation should be taken care of as well. But, in any case, straight alphabetization was not the chosen format, which listed historically important Downtowns first, followed by an alphabetical listing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:04, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Understood. I'm surprised the uneven columns slipped past me, as that's an error that irks me when I see it. Thank you for the reply! Jessicapierce (talk) 06:24, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 23[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Drive by...[edit]

Just stopping by to say "hi", and wish you well. Atsme📞📧 21:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, thanks very much, the same to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


Can you please explain why the inability on Tammany Hall is italicized? Eddie891 (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, because Tammany's rise was made possible by their ability to control the Irish immigrants which formed their base, to direct how they voted. In the instance you refer to, it was, by contrast, their inability to control them which began their downfall. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

"Warner Bros."[edit]

Ken, will do. On the Wikipedia page for "Warner Bros." it does note the full name as an accepted alternative usage. I had changed it simply to avoid the "visual complication" of having a period within the body of the sentence. I certainly defer to your expertise on this and will not make any such additional changes. Thanks. --Neil (Strudjum) Strudjum (talk) 03:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Patricia Highsmith[edit]

I reversed your alteration of the page layout per WP guidelines as found in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout and layout sample. As you must know by now, Wikipedia is not a 'do whatever you feel like' website. It has editing policies and guidelines in place. I have ideas of my own about articles that I cannot indulge because they contradict Wikipedia's rules. And as you must also know by now, everything we do as editors must be based on and supported by Wikipedia procedures. By the way, is there a reason why you removed the "Expand section" tag from the */Writing career/* section, which is still anemic considering the scope of Highsmith's works? Pyxis Solitary (talk) 09:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure, whatever, edit robotically, don't evaluate whether my layout is better for the reader and the article, it's no skin off of my nose, as long as the almighty god MOS is fed and watered. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:32, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Prescott Townsend[edit]

As I said, I will not unrevert your reverting, I'm tired of discussing what is a better photos, or more update photos, of others. I have even ignored when you removed photos of a specific house/building in an article, when there was not another similar photos, but there were other photos. But removing the house of Prescott Townsend from his wikipedia article, a photo I took with a purpose, driving in the place for that specific reason, and that I was willing to share, given that there is NO photos at all in that article, and tagging them as "unnecessary", that is beyond my comprehension. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 13:06, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you were "done with Wikipedia", so I haven't posted a comment on your talk page to the effect that many of your images are problematic. Many are too dark, some are very badly composed, others are just plain bad - nothing to discuss, they just stink. Further, you throw multiple images into an article without any concern for what they do to the article layout, and, what's worse, you replace decent photos with your own very much less than stellar ones.
As I said, since I thought you had retired, I wasn't going to say any of this, but I've spent at least ten hours so far fixing the problems you created, with more to go, and on only a few occasions did I simply remove your photos. For the most part I've tried my best to make them work. In this case, you added two photos where one would have done, and, yes, I guess I was a little tired of working on your messes and I deleted both of them. (I've just restored one.) However, I don't think you're in much of a position to complain, since your editing has been sloppy and destructive, and your images are, for the most part, merely adequate additions to the articles. It's really not necessary that we have photographs of where every LGBT luminary in the past 100 years has lived. Where your images improved the articles, great, kudos to you, but I wouldn't get up on your high horse and start bitching after all the problems you created on multiple articles in just a few days. (And, BTW, neither Wikipedia nor Commons is a promotional medium, so your use of them to promote your "travel guide" is contrary to policy.). Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:31, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Please don't bite the newcomers (User:Elisa.rolle)[edit]

Information icon I noticed that a message you recently left to a newcomer may have been unduly harsh for a newcomer. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 00:30, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

When a newbie creates a mess, and ignores the advice given them to stop creating more messes, whatever comes to them is deserved, so please take a hike, and while you're there, read WP:DTTR. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:31, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Also, when they are uploading pictures as a method of promoting their own book, that's conflict of interest. I have been changing the picture descriptions on WikiCommons so they describe the pictures instead. --Ebyabe talk - Attract and Repel ‖ 05:18, 27 March 2017 (UTC)