User talk:General Ization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Dwpaul)
Jump to: navigation, search

PLEASE READ

Stop icon
If I have nominated your article for deletion, removed your content or reverted your change and you would like to know why,
please review the following Wikipedia policies and guidelines, among others that may be mentioned in a message I left on your Talk page:


If none of these pages addresses your concerns,
you can leave me a note.
If you do, please sign and date your post by typing four tildes: ~~~~.

If you can't be bothered to do any of this, please do not post on my page.

Contents

Add to filmography[edit]

Missing "Benny and June" from filmography Dolores "Lorry" Corsi 104.6.168.213 (talk) 01:44, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@104.6.168.213: Sorry, which article (whose filmography) are you referring to? Dwpaul Talk 01:46, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the re-edit[edit]

I committed a typo when revising Sandberg's Mother's career info, which I tried to fix but it had already been reverted. Roblaw42 is "undo" happy. I think my description worked but so does yours. Either is better than the previous verbiage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.45.19.38 (talk) 21:58, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

thanks for fixing the Tillandsia article[edit]

I'll review what was done and try to make sense of it, I'd just rather someone do it competently, and in 13 seconds, rather than my hamfisted, 90 minute method.-rudyard (talk) 23:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't do anything to Tillandsia recurvata; I just noticed that another editor had already reverted the most recent vandalism. If there are older changes you think are vandalism, bring them up on the article's Talk page. Dwpaul Talk 00:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

YGM[edit]

You've got mail. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 03:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Bill Maher[edit]

Hello. Why did you revert my edit on "Bill Maher"? The pronunciation /ɑːr/ is not an English standard diaphoneme (see Help:IPA_for_English). What other words use that word-finally? "Maher" rhymes with car and spar, so it's /ɑr/, correct? Wolfdog (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Wolfdog: Could be. Your edit to this biographical article included no edit summary, and was unsourced. Present your argument on the Talk page of the article to gain consensus for the change. I'll !vote in favor, but that's only two of us. Dwpaul Talk 00:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Is that how all things, even small ones, are determined on the Bill Maher page? There was no source there to begin with, so the current pronunciation, according to this logic, already shouldn't stand. I'd be happy to write an edit summary; it just slipped my mind. Wolfdog (talk) 01:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I am not the arbiter of how "things... are determined on the Bill Maher page". I do have some thoughts, though, about Wikipedia policies. You are describing (presumably) how you have heard Bill Maher pronounce his last name, and your assertion (which could be perfectly correct) as to how it should be expressed in IPA. That is not how everyone with the last name Maher pronounces it, so the assertion that Maher pronounces it a certain way is something that should either be sourced or established as a matter of consensus, not simply changed as a consequence of original research (i.e., what you have heard). As for there being no source to begin with, see WP:BURDEN. If you add or change content, you are responsible for what you have added or changed. The fact that something you changed or replaced was unsourced to begin with doesn't relieve you of your burden, especially if someone challenges it (as I have done). Dwpaul Talk 01:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Or you can just try making the change again. I won't revert it, having made my case about it, but I'll bet you a dollar another editor will. To save you time and trouble, I strongly recommend that you take a little time to seek consensus, as I suggested. Dwpaul Talk 01:42, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
OK. My problem really wasn't about how I "have heard Bill Maher pronounce his last name," so much as the second part of that sentence I'm quoting you on: "how it should be expressed in IPA." Word-final /ɑːr/ is not standard on Wikipedia and doesn't align to IPA usage as specified on the related English-language help page. So at the risk of being naïve, I'm going to change it again; I'll happily let you give me an "I toldja so" when I fail. I appreciate your explanation. Wolfdog (talk) 02:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Uh-oh, I think I may be wrong on a technical level and the reason the IPA looked strange to me is because the current IPA template just doesn't support the rare /ɑːr/ as a single phoneme, so it's awkwardly divided into two separate ones. Oh well... Wikipedia inconsistencies confusing me. Wolfdog (talk) 03:02, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

TWL Questia check-in[edit]

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

  • Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
  • When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
  • Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
  • Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of National Names 2000 10:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Just wanted to say thanks.

Although you removed the map image that I put on the Sriracha Sauce page, you were kind about it and explained your decision. I agree with your revision.

I'm new here, and I'm learning - I appreciate you taking the time.

Best,

Srirachachacha (talk) 01:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC) Srirachachacha May 12, 2015

@Srirachachacha: You're welcome, and thanks for letting me know that you understand and for being gracious about it. It's never fun being reverted; I know, I have been also. But sometimes, in the long run, it makes for a better article. Happy editing! Dwpaul Talk 02:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Guidance for a Beginner - Enrica Lexie case[edit]

Hi Dwpaul

You were very helpful when I first began editing a few articles. I've been working on the Enrica Lexie case page for a while. I have a strong academic interest in it and have been hoping to do two things - (1) Make it readable - it is really horrible - and this is still after I have taken so much out (2) Accommodate the contentious nature of the issue - for each issue try first to distill the consensus and then cite both sides of the ongoing arguments.

However it is still far far too long and some information is either completely tangential or is just there without relevance being explained. What is the best way to move forward with something like this? One of my issues is much of the tangential and irrelevant information is referenced (correctly) and so I have got in trouble deleting some of it. Does every single sentence with a citation have to stay? I think the POV is appropriately balanced (more or less). The issue is very contentious - there is a legitimate dispute as to some of the facts and some of the legal issues in play. However does that mean that every single argument and comment from either side on every single aspect of this multifaceted issue must be included? Also, some of the edits and talk comments from both sides are bordering on the emotional. The whole article does not flow. Things are in the wrong section. Many things are repeated, etc. I've been Wikipedia articles on equally contentious issues that are concise and readable.

I want to continue to contribute but I'm worried I've hit a brick wall. Are there perhaps some editors or moderators who are respected and have had experience in effectively doing a ground up rebuild of such a contentious page? This would be ideal. Your guidance would be appreciated.

Thank you 131.111.141.163 (talk) 05:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC) (also LOTScholar)

@131.111.141.163: Sorry, I realize that this is your second request of me for help on this. Candidly, I neither feel strongly enough about the subject (this might be a plus) nor feel I have the time available right now to participate or even assist in a complete rewrite of this article, the subject of which is clearly controversial. My involvement with it has been limited to reverting obvious vandalism, and this may be for the best as I could see this requiring a high level of attention and focus. Kudos to you for taking it on. You might post a request for assistance at WP:Editor assistance. Dwpaul Talk 19:46, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Bo Dallas Spouse[edit]

According to the Sarah Bäckman page I looked at, it say's that she's currently married to him. But I will provide a source next time when i add her back int he article. FrozenFan2 (talk) 19:36, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, please. We cannot rely on the presence of a cited source on a different page. Also, please be sure it's a reliable source. Dwpaul Talk 19:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Alas, since the cited source at Sarah Bäckman for her supposed marriage to Dallas never mentions Sarah Bäckman at all, it is not a reliable source. (Even if some of the commentators at that link mention her by name, she is not mentioned in the published article at the link.) Dwpaul Talk 20:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Right, and I understand what you mean. FrozenFan2 (talk) 21:08, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
@FrozenFan2: Here is an updated ref from the same source that names her. Dwpaul Talk 21:20, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Ciara jackie[edit]

Please stop editing this album genre to R&B because clearly you aren't a fan and haven't heard the album IT IS A POP AND EDM album with ONE R&B song on it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csquadforever (talkcontribs) 13:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Csquadforever: Please stop changing genres on the album without establishing consensus with other editors, because you clearly haven't read WP:GWARRIOR or WP:EW, the latter of which (as have now been warned multiple times) will result in your being blocked from editing. Dwpaul Talk 19:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
And so you have. If you resume this activity when your block expires, you will be blocked again. Please read both articles linked above and contribute constructively when you are again able to do so. Dwpaul Talk 19:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry[edit]

My brother did bypassing. I'm so sorry. Please, I am sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMTPOWMRLOL (talkcontribs) 22:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@RMTPOWMRLOL: "Your brother" apparently needs help. In any case, as long as there is any chance of your brother having access to your account, it is probable that the same unacceptable behavior will be repeated, and this is unacceptable to the project. The ability to edit Wikipedia using your account (as well as to edit your own Talk page) has been permanently disabled. Dwpaul Talk 22:36, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:DOLT[edit]

See the discussion at WP:ANI, the prior notices on the IP's talk page. I think this warning [1] is late and not needed. Might you consider reverting yourself? Thanks. JoeSperrazza (talk) 23:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@JoeSperrazza: I was aware of the discussion at ANI, but what I did not see was that anyone had provided the editor the benefit of the standard warning concerning legal threats. I can't think of any reason not to inform the user of the policy, even if the information they objected to has subsequently been removed, especially since the threat was issued twice. Can you? Dwpaul Talk 23:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
What would probably be more useful than reverting the standard NLT warning is if someone would inform the editor in a friendly message on their Talk page(s) that the content they objected to has been removed. I don't see that that's been done either; just a link to the ANI discussion. That message, in combination with the standard NLT template, is probably the right balance to address the concerns mentioned at WP:DOLT. Dwpaul Talk 23:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Aztec[edit]

Wouldn't Category:States and territories established in 1325 be wrong to include as well? That's why I was including Category:1325 establishments. Would 1323 be a better example as that's the legendary year for the vision? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on the Aztec, but by my reading there is no singular event that defines the beginning of the Aztec people or culture (unlike the events of 1520-21, including the smallpox epidemic, that led to the destruction of Tenochtitlan and rapidly to the end of the empire and most of its people). The establishment of Tenochtitlan was unquestionably a key event in the development of the Aztec empire, but I'd argue that the people who became the Aztec existed well prior to this and there should neither be no specific date of "establishment" for the Aztec, and that, yes, the other category is probably inappropriate here also (it is entirely appropriate at Tenochtitlan. Dwpaul Talk 23:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I understand. Let's move this to Talk:Aztec as I think that's a better place for this discussion. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Dwpaul Talk 23:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Shooting of Michael Brown[edit]

Hi Dwpaul, in regards to a revert you did on the article, you deleted a link from Facebook showing a video and comments of Michael Brown. Although Facebook isn't a place I would personally look for sources, correct me if I'm wrong, but the video and comments seem somewhat legitimate even though the other user put the reference characters on the wrong place. [2] (N0n3up (talk) 02:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC))

A video found on Facebook is not a reliable source for any Wikipedia article unless the Facebook page is the official page of the subject of the article, and even then only for non-controversial information. See WP:SELFPUB. That the video and comments "seem somewhat legitimate" to you does not change the fact that we cannot know whether and how the video has been edited and/or manipulated to promote someone's agenda when it comes from a Facebook page and its original source and integrity are unclear. Dwpaul Talk 02:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. (N0n3up (talk) 04:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC))

Question here[edit]

What is your birth date? --182.190.240.12 (talk) 15:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC) 182 guy.

What kind of question is that? None of your business. Dwpaul Talk 15:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Hayley Atwell[edit]

OK, I found a reflink (Guardian) that references the issue. Yours, Quis separabit? 00:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Rms125a@hotmail.com: Yes, just saw that, was about to comment on your page, but here you are on mine. Face-smile.svg Dwpaul Talk 00:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Jamie Dornan's image[edit]

There has been a conflict over the use of the infobox image in the Jamie Dornan page, I'm hoping that a vote to choose a preferred image would settle the dispute. I am therefore writing to those editors who have ever edited Jamie Dornan page to voice their opinion in the Jamie Dornan Talk page so we can reach a consensus. I would welcome your opinion. Hzh (talk) 13:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)


May 2015[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Diyarbakir shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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. Xelophate talk to me 01:01, 30 May 2015 (BST)

@Xelophate: Really? Tell you what, friend, I invite you a) to read carefully the explanation of edit warring (as well as the explanation of tendentious editing) and then b) to bring this up immediately at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, and we'll just see how that flies. (You should never use this template unless you're prepared to follow through on your assertion.) In the meantime, there are at least two editors who challenge your contention that the Kurdish name of the city doesn't belong in the article. Let's see how the conversation shakes out. You can start by answering the question that Winner 42 posed to you on the Talk page of the article. Dwpaul Talk 01:29, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Steve Womack[edit]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9wHzt6gBgI you're welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exaltedcyclopsedward (talkcontribs) 21:38, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

@Exaltedcyclopsedward: I'm familiar with it. Repeat the edit or anything like it and you'll be blocked from editing. Dwpaul Talk 21:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Don't try to delete my articles[edit]

without my concern I belong to same religion and know the fact and I write it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murtazajamali (talkcontribs) 16:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

@Murtazajamali: I assume you're referring to this reversion, which was the reversion of an edit to an article, not the deletion of an article. See the edit summary of the reversion. I and other editors will continue to remove any content added which is not verifiable by any reader through the citation of one or more reliable sources (it doesn't matter what religion you are or what you may or may not know). A page on causes.com is not a reliable source. Dwpaul Talk 16:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Category changes[edit]

Regarding Bill Cosby: I don't really think of him as a writer, hence the category removal - I've re-added it, as I have no problem with it either way.

Jerry Seinfeld: Again, one doesn't think of him as a writer, and with one published book I might argue he's not known for it. Regarding the fact that he's a scriptwriter, I've been avoiding adding the by-century category to scriptwriters as I'm not sure if it's totally apt in that particular case, for a couple of reasons (see past debate over a category for 20th-century journalists for explanation.) I have re-added it, because I don't care either way.

James Sensenbrenner: oversight on my part. I had him mixed up with someone else, sorry. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:17, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

John Oliver (comedian)[edit]

Hello! I happened to notice the disagreement on my watchlist. Obviously, the IP editor's belief that "English and British are the same thing" reflects gross ignorance on his/her part.

However, the use of "English", "Scottish", "Welsh" and "Northern Irish" in this context is not accidental. The matter has been debated a great deal, with no consensus that either "British" or one of those terms should be applied consistently. In general, I believe, we tend to use the more specific term ("English", in Oliver's case) in the absence of a particular reason to prefer "British". (For example, it makes sense to refer to David Cameron and Harriet Harman as "British", given their roles in UK politics. Conversely, we describe Billy Connolly as "Scottish" and Judi Dench as "English".)

We sometimes consider the subject's self-identification. In this instance, someone cherry-picked examples of Oliver referring to himself as "British", thereby ignoring the fact that he also refers to himself as "English" (a strong indication that we have no reason to avoid the label). —David Levy 23:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@David Levy: Thanks. I was thinking that there must have been some discussion of this at some time or another, but had not known quite where to look for it; appreciate the link, the summary here, and your comments on the article's Talk page. General Ization Talk 01:27, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Nonetheless, I've rangeblocked 2602:30A:C043:5F80:0:0:0:0/64 for a month for IP hopping to genre war as well as semi-protected the article for two weeks. It can be worked out on the talk page via discussion.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 13:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Rod Blagojevich[edit]

Hello there!

With respect, and to continue our edit text conversation because I am unemployed for 6 more hours, I'd like to try to change your mind about my non-defamatory change to Rod Blagojevich's article. I have a particular sensitivity to how people are labelled in their articles (certainly living ones in particular) and believe they should be as clear and descriptive as possible. Placing Mr. Blagojevich's criminal status at the bottom of his introduction does kind of constitute 'burying the lede' since it's in the third sentence and literally the last thing mentioned about him; if I were a TL;DR type or an elementary school kid I would miss it entirely.

Look, I love Blago as much as the next Democrat, but I you must admit that 'former politician' and 'served as governor' are redundant predicates and, moreover, mislead by suggesting a quiet retirement rather than impeachment. Although the difference between 'politician' and 'criminal' is particularly difficult to distinguish in the Illinois gubernatorial setting (given that 4 of the past 8 governors have done or are doing time for corruption) this regional synonymity may elude readers who hail from more than one state away from Illinois. I refer you to the WP articles for Dick Nixon (the first sentence of which includes mention of his resignation) and Chuck Manson (who is apparently not a 'former musician' despite his perfectly legitimate chops).

How about a compromise approach for the first sentence? "Rod Blagojevich was the 40th Governor of Illinois, serving from 2003 until his impeachment in 2009." Then leave the rest of the intro the same? I realize that Blago is almost certainly an inveterate self-googler and it's not like I want the guy to get too down on himself in there. Does that click?


Puckrod (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Ping[edit]

@Medeis: Ping. Face-grin.svg General Ization Talk 00:14, 9 June 2015 (UTC) (formerly known as Dwpaul, BTW.)

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
This barnstar has been awarded in recognition of your tireless work residing in Columbus, Ohio and for you excellent ref desk lurking work. μηδείς (talk) 17:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Hernando de Soto Article changes[edit]

You asked me to leave you a message on your talk page explaining my edits to the de Soto article. Mr. White's claims to have worked at the Richardson site are demonstrably false; as one of many archaeologists following the debate, I noted that Mr. White's filing with the Division of Historical Resources did not take place until after Dr. Boyer's work at Richardson was already published. I personally verified with the landowners of the Richardson site that Mr. White has never worked there. This appears to be a case of plagiarism or outright fraud by Mr. White, who is attempting to claim credit for work he has not done.

As to the second newspaper article Mr. White cites, it was published before the 2014 article - which essentially retracted the previous articles - was published. It creates the false appearance that the earlier article is still current, rather than having been superseded.172.56.26.87 (talk) 02:20, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

You really don't need to bring this up on my Talk page. You need to bring it up on the article's Talk page, where it can be used to help achieve consensus with other knowledgeable editors (more so than me) about the changes you have been persistently making, thus far without any effort to seek consensus and thus disruptively. Also, if you are the user who also edits as Veritas20132014, I caution you that if you are now editing as an IP solely to avoid recognition of edit warring, such conscious evasion is regarded as abuse and can in fact result in both your registered account and your IP being blocked. General Ization Talk 02:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I had thought you meant to leave the comment on your talk page; I will be happy to do so on the article's talk page instead. And while I'm not the user you are referring to, I would note that the professional archaeological community has been highly sceptical of Mr. White's claims from the beginning and has only become more so.172.56.26.87 (talk) 02:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
If there is a controversy about the Richardson site, as this suggests, our article should reflect and report on the controversy neutrally, not take sides and hence cherry-pick sources to support one side of the debate. General Ization Talk 02:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Also, in light of your denial of a connection to the registered user, I will remind myself to assume good faith and offer my apology for the accusation above. It simply seemed more than coincidental that your very first edits here as an IP were to reinstate that user's contested edits. General Ization Talk 02:54, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and I appreciate it. And I agree with you that Wikipedia should represent controversies neutrally - reviewing this or any other issue as a specialist in the field tends to make one assume others are familiar with specific issues when they may not be. However, in light of your recommendations, I'll post my position and some additional sources on the article's talk page and see if some consensus on the question arises. Thank you again for your help!172.56.27.167 (talk) 03:06, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

How to make a page?[edit]

Can you tell me some important tips about making a page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datdicatorofstevensville (talkcontribs) 23:36, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Please see the Welcome message I left on your Talk page. General Ization Talk 00:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Mike Rizzo[edit]

Please stop removing the Personal Life section of Mike Rizzo's page. I know Mike and his wife personally and I assure you that everything written in that section is completely accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snark123 (talkcontribs) 11:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't care that you know him personally. We require reliable sources for personal information in biographical articles here, verifiable by any reader. Your personal knowledge is not verifiable, and the source you provided most recently is a self-publishing site (self.gutenberg.org) hosting a copy of the subject's Wikipedia page here, which cannot be used as a reliable source. Please either provide appropriate sources or stop inserting the information in the article. See also WP:BLPPRIVACY. General Ization Talk 15:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Please explain to me how it is controversial to say who he married, the date of his marriage, and the names of his children. That is pretty much the opposite of controversial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snark123 (talkcontribs) 21:26, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
@Snark123: As previously suggested, see WP:BLPPRIVACY. And including the alleged names and birthdates of non-notable people who happen to be spouses or children of a notable person, even with sources, is always controversial, as a potential violation of their privacy. General Ization Talk 21:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Wanna explain this?[edit]

Please do! Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 19:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh... see you have reverted your edit. Never mind then, must have been a mistake. :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 19:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Warning to IP[edit]

Can you please explain why you gave an only warning for vandalism for a spelling dispute? [3] --NeilN talk to me 01:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

No, not really, though the "Fucking leave it idiots" edit summary probably had something to do with it. General Ization Talk 02:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Dravidian peoples[edit]

Dravidian peoples (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello General Ization

Ancient Dravidian people are a Beautiful black-blue hued skintone people whom are very special indeed. I think a classification known as is an excellent representation of this particular kind of people with remarkably beautiful hued skin; To be also known as "Blue Beauties"

You May google Dravidian blue-black woman, under google images for your intell and historical chic confirmation details.

Thank you, BlueDiamondLand

TY[edit]

I appreciate the heads-up. -- WV 22:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Sam Berns[edit]

interesting edits, call me when you get a youtube video with over 8.882.667 hits


cheers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36m1o-tM05g — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luchador zebra (talkcontribs) 14:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't say it shouldn't be there. I said it needs a citation of a reliable source (and it still does). Absent that, it is likely to be removed. General Ization Talk 15:26, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations[edit]

There is an RfC that you may be interested in at Template talk:Infobox country#RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations. Please join us and help us to determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:11, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

User:204.2.36.121[edit]

Hi. Since you provide a final warning to this user in May, I thought I'd point out to you that he/she again committed vandalism after your final warning, in case you want to block that IP, or notify an admin to do so. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 20:43, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

@Nightscream: Thanks, but since the IP's last edit was on June 2, this is far too stale to act on now. Let's keep an eye on the article. General Ization Talk 22:33, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Lucy Hale[edit]

Hi. The quote used in the AllMusic ref specifically says "Lucy Kate Hale" – if the website no longer says that, then the quote needs to be stricken from the AllMusic ref. But, aside from that, she was clearly credited as Lucy Kate Hale earlier in her career fairly often (e.g. Privileged), and that needs to be mentioned somewhere in the article (I've seen things like this mentioned in the lede in other articles). From what I understand, this info doesn't even need to referenced, as Hale's alt. name is clearly shown in the credits of her earlier TV appearances. --IJBall (contribstalk) 13:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@IJBall: The Allmusic Web site no longer says anything about "Lucy Kate Hale" at the link provided. You seem to be disregarding the possibility that the use of that name to refer to Lucy Hale was an error to begin with, one that has now been corrected at Allmusic.com. When you say "Hale's alt. name is clearly shown in the credits of her earlier TV appearances", you are implying that there is some reliable source that documents this. If one or more of those sources can be cited, then the name should be included. If none of them can, the name should not appear in our article. It should stay out until a source is found. Allmusic is no longer that source. General Ization Talk 15:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
General Ization, you may want to refer to this discussion – in it, NinjaRobotPirate says the following: "Credits in film articles are generally understood to be cited to the primary source itself." The same would obviously also be true of TV show appearances. IOW, for onscreen credits, a secondary reference is not explicitly required (otherwise, every entry in every actor's FILMOGRAPHY table would require a reference). The fact is, Lucy Hale was clearly credited as "Lucy Kate Hale" earlier in her career (e.g. Privileged, Bionic Woman, and The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2, at least). This needs to be mentioned somewhere in the article. I intend to add this back to the article in the near future (sans explicit referencing), unless there's some compelling reason shown that it shouldn't be. --IJBall (contribstalk) 15:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Ah, forgot – for a related example, see Joanne Whalley. --IJBall (contribstalk) 15:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
@IJBall: Perhaps (though I'm not familiar with NRP's credentials to make that judgment), but this is not a film article. It is a biographical article, and as such WP:BLP applies. On something as fundamental and personal as the names someone may or may not have used in the past, any assertion we might make about names a person has used professionally or personally should be supported by reliable sources. General Ization Talk 18:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
That's the point: they already are – in the credits of the two TV shows and one movie I alluded to (note how the credits are listed at the three Wikipedia articles on these), which is hard to prove without a screenshot! But movie and TV show credits themselves are generally considered to be "acceptable sourcing", as per the Talk page discussion I referenced above. In any case, this isn't a controversial addition – it's how she used to be credited. (Hint: Lucy Kate Hale redirects to Lucy Hale). Thus it needs to be mentioned in the article... Anyway, here's "verifiable source" if it makes you feel better.[1] --IJBall (contribstalk) 18:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

References

Lori Alan[edit]

Dear sir, I read all the articles about Lori Alan in OTHER languages, so she was born 1966 in Potomac, Maryland. But, you have DARN right! Thanks for removing the date of birth, although! :) --178.174.243.198 (talk) 20:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

A representative of the subject previously removed the birth date, as apparently that is the preference of the subject. Normally this would not matter, as the subject does not generally get to make these decisions if the content was sourced. However, since we have no sources for the birth date, it should not be included under our policies. If someone can locate and cite a reliable, published source, it can be added again. General Ization Talk 20:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Shia LaBeouf[edit]

Hey. That was important. How date you change that? He's motivated me on another level with his video. I changed it because I wanted to see that when I view his page. And you took that from me. THEWIKIMACHINE (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, the Shia LaBeouf page was not created with your entertainment in mind. This is an encyclopedia, not your desktop wallpaper. Please don't repeat the edit. General Ization Talk 21:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Your recent EW warning on my talk page[edit]

Please read Koala's edit summaries before you slap me with a warning. I explained my edit, he reverted with no summary, and then told me to "go home your [sic] drunk". I should be able to stand my ground in such situations. Please advise, thanks. EauZenCashHaveIt (I'm All Ears) 00:09, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@EauZenCashHaveIt: I read the other editor's summary, and if you'll take the time yourself to read their Talk page, you'll see that I addressed the issue with them. An uncivil edit summary, however, isn't a license to edit war, and your reasserting the edit doesn't "punish" another editor for their misdeeds; it just escalates the situation over a trivial edit that is hardly worth getting yourself blocked. The warning stands; ignore it at your own risk. General Ization Talk 00:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services


Sign up now


Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Block of user 108.7.58.110[edit]

MaterialScientist blocked the above user for altering release dates for a large number of 1980s singles – while I completely agree with the block as his/her edits were unsourced, I just wanted to point out that his/her dates are very likely correct, at least for the British singles, as Friday was the standard release day for singles and albums in the UK back in the early 1980s. But obviously without any references, it's impossible to prove any of the changes, so I agree that the original dates should be left until we can definiively say otherwise. I may go to the British Library and try and check out some of these release dates in the music magazines of the time. Richard3120 (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

The edits were unsourced, no edit summaries were provided, and both the volume and the rate of the changes were highly suspect, on the order of one every 15 to 20 seconds. In addition, many of the singles whose articles were being "corrected" were singles initially released in the US – so if the IP was changing to the nearest Friday based on this convention, the edits may or may not have been correct. (I do note they were changing dates to dmy format, whether or not appropriate for a given article, so your theory sounds plausible.) General Ization Talk 20:10, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Blocking Warning[edit]

I got your message for not editing disruptively anymore and I will keep it in my mind. But can you tell me why you gave me the second and "Final Warning" before I even see the first warning and comply to your request ?!?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezyjoon (talkcontribs) 23:57, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bezyjoon: I cannot tell what you have seen or not seen. I can only see that you repeated the same disruptive edits even after the first warning was left and the edits were reverted with an explanatory edit summary. It's your responsibility to read messages left on your Talk page promptly, and to pay attention to the information in the edit summary if and when someone reverts your change. General Ization Talk 00:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe you should be more respectful to other contributor's right !! and you are not supposed to take advantage of your position !! You gave me warning and I complied with it as soon as I saw it, but You gave me the second warning in LESS THAN ONE MINUTES !! Is that the policy of Wikipedia that you are allowed to give someone the second and final warning in less than a minute, even without give him enough time to read the first one ?!?!? SERIOUSLY ??? I am so disappointed with wikipedia with your unrespectful behaviour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezyjoon (talkcontribs) 00:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bezyjoon: Today, on Jerry Garcia alone, you made a total of 10 edits that were disruptive, including three reversions of other editors' reversions of your disruptive edits, all before the last two warnings you received. Given that you have not yet been blocked, I would not push my luck if I was you. General Ization Talk 00:24, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Protection request at Talk:Roman Republic[edit]

That was an IP messing around on talk pages and adding random and at times ridiculous wikilinks to articles. I was going to delete it but you replied - if you want to delete it all, feel free. Doug Weller (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Justin Bieber[edit]

Justin Bieber not actor. He never really acted in a movie. In Behaving Badly it makes figuration for 2 seconds and Zoolander 2 will it makes himself. In the series Punk'd he also participated as himself and in Cubed he also does so figuration. Actors and singers are eg Justin Timberlake who has made 17 films still having plans to record other, Jamie Foxx made 33 films and won the best actor Oscar in 2004. If so everyone would be actor and singer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Equipe W (talkcontribs) 01:17, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

We do not need to compare the accomplishments of people who act to determine if they are actors or not. There are many actors who have appeared in only one work (stage or screen) and have won no awards – they are nevertheless actors. Bieber's acting may not be what has made him notable, but it is among his occupations. You seem to be confusing the term actor with movie star, one of which I would certainly agree that Bieber is not. Do not remove the content again. General Ization Talk 01:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

So using your logic Jennifer Lawrence and Emma Watson are singers. Jennifer recorded a song The Hanging Tree and Emma has recorded Fimes singing like The Perks of Being a Wallflower and Beauty and the Beast. I think the real problem is that I'm dealing with a Belieber--Equipe W (talk) 01:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@Equipe W: First, read WP:CIVILITY. I think the real problem is that you have contributed 30 edits on Wikipedia in four months and I've contributed 30,000 in nine and half years. I don't mean to be rude, but spend a little time learning how things work around here before you engage in arguments with other editors about encyclopedic content. And yes, that's correct. They are indeed singers. They are not recording artists. 01:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)General Ization Talk

I actually work at wikipedia the years the account is new--Equipe W (talk) 01:46, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

That's nice. Surprising, then, that you are as unfamiliar with the principles we use here (as well as procedures, such as signing your edits on Talk pages) as you apparently are. My suggestion stands. Please stop trolling my page. General Ization Talk 01:49, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Quick little note[edit]

I want to drop on by and let you know that I quite like your username. Face-smile.svg Cheers, —  dainomite   21:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Reverting the archive bot?[edit]

Were you unhappy with the work of the archive bot at WP:AN3? It might have been helpful if you had left an edit summary. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Nope, not at all. I don't recall the edit; it must have been an errant click. Apologies to you and to the 'bot. General Ization Talk 03:15, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
I even had to double-check that I didn't have an imposter, but sure enough, there it is in my contributions. No explanation at all to offer. General Ization Talk 03:18, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Revised message with signature[edit]

Hi, I would like to find out exactly why I should be nominated as I am just trying to provide correct information. I was nominated in regards to writing that Sam and Dan Houser are both Americans. They are Americans. It says so in the page below, so I mentioned it at the top too. Where they were born should not be the only identifier. Plenty of people for instance are born in another country, but live out their lives elsewhere and feel they are of this nationality or that. Either way, on a technicality they are still Americans. 58.107.118.7 (talk) 06:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@58.107.118.7: I have updated the article on Sam Houser to properly indicate that he is English American and has American citizenship. I see no evidence to support the same or any similar change for Dan Houser. General Ization Talk 06:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Sosyallift[edit]

Hello General Ization. I am just letting you know that I deleted Sosyallift, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:27, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi General Ization. A quick note: just because an article isn't in English - in this case it was in Turkish - isn't a reason for speedy deletion. You might like to see Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:44, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Penguins of Madagascar[edit]

Its a little dramatic to remove every review from the section. I think we should keep at least one well written paragraph. Koala15 (talk) 16:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the facts of the Iranian Revolution[edit]

Mohammad Mossadegh was never "democratically elected" Prime Minister. Iran has never been a democracy at any point in its history. He was appointed by The Shah. This is common knowledge.

Kindly delete the verbage about The Shah or his reign as monarch in manner that is false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SonOfIran (talkcontribs) 00:44, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@SonOfIran: I will do no such thing. Both the statement you removed and the statement you attempted to negate are reliably sourced. I will not remove them merely because you disagree with them, and if you attempt to do so again your edits will again be reverted. You are free to bring up your concerns on the article's Talk page. General Ization Talk 00:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your astonishing work at Seth Rollins, I'm proud to present to you the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar! Thanks again for your tireless efforts to keep Wikipedia clean of vandalism. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 02:00, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Jimi Hendrix[edit]

Hi! Would you care to comment at this RfC regarding the article Jimi Hendrix? It is about whether "acid rock" belongs in the infobox or not. Dan56 (talk) 04:32, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you![edit]

Erdbeerteller01.jpg Thanks for your help reverting vandalism. It's very much appreciated! GAB (talk) 01:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

change[edit]

Madw my citation and it is correct information. Cthornley85 (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thanks! I see my post was ok. Just got revised a little which is totally fine. Good job! :) Cthornley85 (talk) 22:34, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Isaac Newton[edit]

I would not normally undo a fellow vandal patroller, but in the case of the apocalyptic dates, the source clearly specifies 2060 and not 2015. I'd rather talk than revert on this one, but the source is plain. Why are you seeing things differently, what am I missing? Thanks! ScrpIronIV 19:27, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

See your Talk page. Unintended, no issue at all with your edit. Thanks. General Ization Talk 19:29, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Shin-Soo Choo[edit]

I noticed your revert of an edit on Shin-Soo Choo. While I personally have no problem with hitting for the cycle being in the infobox it does appear that Lmeade10 may have a point when it comes to standardizing all articles to not include that information in the infobox as a career highlight (per the current style suggestions, based on WP:Baseball consensus). If in fact there is an opposing view should we take it up in WP:Baseball? This user has changed over 100 articles this way, so if we all have a consensus to include it we should make them aware, and change the others back as well! Thanks, Garchy (talk) 20:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

And now I'm confused...is this user putting them BACK after taking them all off? I noticed you removing it...wasn't sure what's going on after a second look! Garchy (talk) 20:38, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I've got it now - it was Newsjunky12 making the initial changes. We can just ignore this entire thing now :) Garchy (talk) 20:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
@Garchy: Thanks ... I don't have a dog in this hunt at all, I was relying on the previous, recent reversion of this info (in fact copied the prior summary) for the information that consensus was against the change. Probably should've stayed out of it. Face-grin.svg General Ization Talk 20:45, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Well you certainly made the right call! If only I had seen that the FIRST time I went through the edit summary ;-) Cheers! Garchy (talk) 20:51, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism concerning Greek mythology[edit]

Hey! I do that is right! Golgos is not sure to be Aphrodite and Adonis's son! Tuyết xanh (talk) 15:41, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Adding the comment "(possibly)" to a variety of articles about Greek mythology, on statements for which reliable sources are cited, is not constructive editing. It is an expression of doubt concerning our cited sources, and hence is an opinion that conflicts with those sources. Please stop now. General Ization Talk 15:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
And this was pure vandalism, for which you could have no possible excuse. General Ization Talk 15:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Hussein Fatal died on Friday July 10th[edit]

Dont contribute to the spreading of false information, just because every shitty news agency gets a date wrong doesnt then make it the right date. Heres the first report of the accident, before anybody knew who it was that was killed http://accesswdun.com/article/2015/7/322252/one-person-killed-in-banks-county-wreck-on-i-85

Friday July10th, not Saturday July 11th

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caszual (talkcontribs) 22:33, 25 July 2015‎ (UTC)

@Caszual: Perhaps you ought to take another look at the article and at its edit history. Please remember to sign your comments on any Talk page by typing four tildes (~~~~). General Ization Talk 22:36, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Also, keep in mind that first reports are more likely to be unreliable, not less, regardless of what they are reporting. General Ization Talk 22:38, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing Hussein Fatals DOD[edit]

I apologize for assuming it was you that had changed my edit.I dont ever edit anything on wiki so I was trying my best to figure out how it all works. Thank you for fixing the date and for the tips Caszual (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for helping maine[edit]

your answer is helpful for mine. (Leave for autosig by robot) — Preceding unsigned comment added by UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ (talkcontribs) 01:34 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ: You're welcome. However, please do not rely on the bot to autosign your comments, as this does not happen immediately, and bots are taken out of service from time to time, leaving your comments unidentified and creating confusion. It really shouldn't be so hard to type four tildes (~~~~) after your comments, certainly less so than typing "(Leave for autosig by robot)". General Ization Talk 01:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Joyland Update[edit]

Since I am new and really have no clue what I am doing, I thought that I would simply give you the information you previously deleted, with the only citation I can find, and let you add it to the Joyland article if you so desire.

Joyland's Roller Coaster was unceremoniously demolished on Thursday, July 23, 2015. http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/effort-underway-to-tear-down-joyland/32334116

Thanks,

Lisa Thomas LTHOMAS55 (talk) 12:40, 26 July 2015 (UTC

Apologies[edit]

Am using my tablet, and following a "screen jump", I mistapped on rollback rather than "diff". Sorry for any confusion. -- WV 14:37, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

D'oh![edit]

Consider me self-trouted for this edit that you reverted on Friday. Was in a rush at the time, and should've read the actual article a little more closely. I'm just used to people labeling someone a country musician as an insult, and probably more guarded about editsum-less IP edits than I should be. BLUSTER⌉⌊BLASTER 11:06, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Persondata[edit]

I noticed you are working to confirm the birth date in the Charles Darrow article, and that you have edited the template. That template is depricated, as noted on the documentation of the template. Please delete the template as part of your updates to the article. Also, it is likely the person has a Wikidata entry; please update the birth date and reference there too. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:13, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jc3s5h: I have seen some discussion (can't recall where) of the template with the information that the templates should not be removed on sight. Apparently some articles may require further processing before they are removed. I will leave that for others who know more about it. Also, I found an article in the August 29, 1967 edition of the Chicago Tribune that states he died "today". Obviously, that could mean he died on the 29th, or it could mean he died on the 28th and the wire service article was delayed. But I have two sources (Find-A-Grave and the Trib) that both say the 29th and only one (NYT) behind a paywall that (apparently) says the 28th, so I have restored the original date to the article (with the Trib ref and a Find-A-Grave template). General Ization Talk 19:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Oops, I just noticed the Trib article has a slug that specified the story moved on the wire August 28, so I am back to the article to change the date yet again! General Ization Talk 19:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
I also don't recall off the top of my head where the discussion was about persondata, but the gist of it was that we should give an opportunity to copy the data to wikidata before deleting. If you check wikidata and insure the data is at least as good as the data in wikipedia (including referencing) it would be fine to delete the persondata template. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Jjgoatin[edit]

I've reported this user to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. He was blocked before, used both account and IP, and persists with this vandalism. Only logical end. Spartan7W § 01:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

And I reported him at WP:ANEW. General Ization Talk 01:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
He's blanking out talk pages for his various IP addresses. I'd bet you a few Cokes that he'll become a nice sockpuppet. Spartan7W § 01:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
@Spartan7W: Don't revert his blanking. He is entitled to blank his own Talk page if he wants to. Your restoring the content is actually against policy. Admins know well enough to look at the history, not just at the current state of the page, and his having blanked it is behavioral evidence. General Ization Talk 01:52, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
You say "various IP addresses". If you know of others, you should add them to the reports at WP:AIV and WP:ANEW. Thanks. General Ization Talk 01:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
And you're now at 3RR on his Talk page. I suggest you not continue reverting his blanking. General Ization Talk 01:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Reported other IP address. I intended to stop at 3, thought he was using a different address. I did have the 'eureka' moment on my own, forgot he was going at his own talk page. Spartan7W § 02:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
@@Spartan7W: Now blocked indef. Thanks. General Ization Talk 13:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Sandy Bullock[edit]

I went to ECU with Sandy, worked with Sandy at Heart's Delight Ice Cream Shoppe, lived in the same dorm as her and have had many conversations with her in the past 20 years. I personally know she was not in the graduation commencement program because she was 3 credits shy.

Here is my source: Sandra Bullock - Film Actress - Biography.com www.biography.com/people/sandra-bullock-9542453 Bullock had no problem fitting in, becoming involved in cheerleading and school theater productions until her graduation in 1982. Bullock then enrolled in East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina, to study acting, but left college only three credits shy of her bachelor's degree.

GoodnessGrowsAHome (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

@GoodnessGrowsAHome: Please explain then how it is she received a BFA degree at the ECU Commencement on May 9, 1987 and her name appears on page 9 of the linked Commencement program. Your personal knowledge or belief, by themselves, are irrelevant here -- we rely on reliable, published sources, and that certainly appears to be one. If you have some other reliable source that explains the discrepancy, please identify it. Note that 5 years elapsed from 1982 to 1987 – enough time that she may have left the college and returned, perhaps more than once. But we would need a reliable source to say that. General Ization Talk 16:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Also please note that even if the source you mention here did not conflict with the cited source, your having made the edit you made without supplying a citation of a reliable source is a violation of our policies on biographical articles. General Ization Talk 16:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Louis Tomlinson[edit]

On Leighton Meester's (who is obviously, visibly, about-to-pop pregnant with many photos to prove so) Wiki every reliably sourced mention of pregnancy is removed because apparently there has been no formal announcement. With Louis Tomlinson, no one from his camp has commented on anything at all. It's all heresay so far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trillfendi (talkcontribs) 02:33, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@Trillfendi: The word is hearsay. I personally believe we have adequate sources that report on Tomlinson's pending offspring to include this info, but another editor does not, and removed it; I have not chosen to pursue it, because frankly I don't care whether it's added (as long as reliably sourced) or not. That was over a week ago now. And please sign your comments on any Talk page by typing four tildes (~~~~). General Ization Talk 02:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

The word is hearsay. I was quite sleepy when I wrote that comment. I should turn Autocorrect back on. Anyway, the real truth will come out eventually, she can't be 11 months pregnant if something doesn't add up. Trillfendi (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)