User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2013/Dec

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

To answer your question...

No, this isn't about punishments and fairness. It's about getting this thing resolved. It's too late to block Neljack and have it serve its purpose to prevent something. At this point, the right action is to discuss what happened and how to prevent it in the future. My opinion, on that, is to explain to Neljack that next time he should bring the issue to a noticeboard if someone reverts his redaction that he feels is a legitimate BLP complaint.--v/r - TP 22:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 22:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Refactoring comments at ANI

Hi. Was this an error? Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 01:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for bringing it to my attention. Epicgenius (talk) 01:25, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
NP, done the same myself by accident. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 01:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Reverting my edits

Hello. Can you please explain the reverts that you made pertaining my recent edits?

Thanks for understanding.--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 10:57, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

And please give me a rational reason about the reverts made by you, otherwise cancel the rollback.--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 11:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
My understanding was that the edits you made to Georgian/Armenian spelling changes were wrong (but I may be wrong, as I don't know that much about the Georgian and Armenian alphabets). You've got to talk to Proudbolsahye about this and work it out. Epicgenius (talk) 13:32, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Station layouts

Excuse me, what was the intention of this edit? The three station layouts that I had originally put there are three examples of the three cases listed above. The two additional layouts do not add anything as examples, so what do you mean? Vcohen (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Examples of stations with upper and lower level platforms that are really complex. Epicgenius (talk) 17:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
OK. If so, I think West Fourth Street – Washington Square (New York City Subway) is more complex. Vcohen (talk) 17:21, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Then add it to the article. Epicgenius (talk) 17:23, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
I want to remove some of them. Maybe I will add it in place of something. Vcohen (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Let's discuss that at WT:NYCPT instead. Epicgenius (talk) 18:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 Done Vcohen (talk) 20:28, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

What did I do wrong?

Thanks for the trouting, but I'm just curious what particular piece of silliness did I get it for. I'm sure it involves defending Joe. Joe would still be blocked if I didn't push TigerShark to ANI. Drmies and TParis thought the block was harsh or wrong, but weren't willing to carry the ball to ANI.

Next time you trout someone, its better if its covered in tartar sauce. Cheers!...William 17:43, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

It's for defending Joe. What you did isn't that silly—but the ANI incident was hilarious. Epicgenius (talk) 17:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for answering. What gets done by administrators to editors and them getting away with it makes my blood boil but I'm sure you guessed that already. I think TigerShark's 0RR proposal should be a nominee for the worst ever made by an administrator at ANI. His judgment is so bad, if there was justice around here. administrators would have asked for him to turn in his bit. TShark has made 600 edits since December 2011. Wikipedia wouldn't be hurting by going without one less administrator that active. Somehow I bet TigerShark will be MIA for a long time. (That's unless I raise all those indefinite blocks he made against IPs. My name is Mud with most every administrator so I'm not very bothered by what they'll think of me if I raise that.) Administrators who start feeling the heat take wikibreaks. Other common practices are hatting administrator critical comments at ANI and quickly closing a ANI thread when the heat starts increasing against a particular administrator. How long was it between a mention of a RFC|U(not by me) on TigerShark and Toddst1's closure of the thread? Note Toddst1's use of the words witch hunt. More diplomatic closing admins at ANI say the thread is getting off topic or off on some tangent. I've noticed these practices more than a few times.
I'd really like to do something more constructive than ANI. Like completing the task of getting a win and playoff box into every Champions Tour golfer article for those golfers who won on that pro tour. I've done from Aaron to Mouland(I'd estimate I've done 75% or more of the players who come alphabetically after Mouland too) plus all golfers with 10 or more Champions Tour wins lifetime no matter where they are in the alphabet. Maybe somebody will give me a barnstar when I am done but I wouldn't count on it....William 18:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Precisely. Epicgenius (talk) 18:48, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello!

Thanks for that thank you! See what I did there? Nezzy (Talk)|(Editor contributions) 18:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Oops, I forgot to sign my comment, Epicgenius (talk) 18:49, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Paradas continuas

I'm curious why you chose to rename this page. The correct Spanish spelling includes a diacritic. As the name does not commonly appear without the diacritic, and as Wikipedia does not, as far as I know, have a policy on diacritics in titles (there was a failed proposal for one), it seems to me that the title with the diacritic was superior. Pburka (talk) 19:28, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for telling me about the mistake, but I thought that that was the common English spelling of the name. Epicgenius (talk) 19:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
It would only be the common English spelling if it were used that way in reliable sources. I haven't seen any English reliable sources referring to the film, so I think it's best to stick with the Spanish spelling. Pburka (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
That's because the film in Spanish, so most of the sources would be in Spanish. Epicgenius (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

What do you do if you unwittingly started a new Wikipedia account that uses the same email address as an old one?

I thought I couldn't access the old account because I wasn't sure about the email address. The password reset for the old account came a lot later than I expected so I wound up creating the Wikipedia account 'Leonard Teal' can the accounts be merged or something? What should I do about it? Leonard Teal (talk) 21:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It's no big deal, really; just choose the one you want to use and only use that one going forward. There's no way to delete or merge accounts, so it's fine to just leave the other one be. Cheers! Writ Keeper  21:27, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Go ask a bureaucrat to merge them at Changing username/Usurpations if you have connected the old account with an email address. What Writ Keeper said. Epicgenius (talk) 21:28, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

FA icon

See the instructions at Template:Featured article: "This template should be placed at the bottom of the article before defaultsort, categories and interwikis." You moved the FA template to the top of Disappearance of Natalee Holloway. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Am I also to assume that KMLs, coords, and GA icons also belong down there, too? My understanding is that the templates should be placed closest to where they visually are on the article (for example, TOC templates are usually placed on the first section of an article). Epicgenius (talk) 02:00, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't know anything about those other things ... I only speak FA :) Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I will not do these things to the FA icons next time. Epicgenius (talk) 02:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I found same for Template:Good article (bottom). I think that's so they won't get accidentally deleted. Makes sense to me. By the way, your ping didn't work ... weird ... I saw you had responded on my watchlist, but I didn't get a notification ping. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
@SandyGeorgia: To get notification pings, you have to go to Special:Preferences and check the relevant boxes under the "Notifications" tab. You may not be getting the pings because the box is not checked. Epicgenius (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I get pings ... and I got this one! First one glitched ... maybe because I happened to hit your talk page the same time you sent it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:38, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay. Then, that ping problem is solved! Face-smile.svg Epicgenius (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6

Queens Library
Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

Leonti Mroveli

See Ingushetia and Chechnya - one of these is the source of the repeated edits. Of the sources used, only the Science J Nichols piece might be a RS and I have no idea what it says. Dougweller (talk) 11:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

@Dougweller: I am very sorry, but I have to admit that I have no idea what you are talking about. Best, Epicgenius (talk) 15:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
My fault. The material you removed with [1] is copied from one of those articles and is dubious at best. Dougweller (talk) 16:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I understand now. Anyway, I had restored the text because at the time, it seemed appropriate for the article, to me. I will look into it. Epicgenius (talk) 16:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
It looks like a copypaste from Ingushetia#Origin of Ingushetia.27s population. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
It is, and that's badly sourced and might be pov. I'd need to look more. Dougweller (talk) 17:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
It is POV. See this ref, from Ingushetia. Epicgenius (talk) 17:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Inverted Totalitarianism

Why are you restoring an irrelevant rant on the Inverted Totalitarianism page? It's political opinion nothing to do with Wolin's theory. It's clear you know SFA about the subject — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.90.196.15 (talk) 17:59, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

  • (edit conflict) I agree that it is a huge wall of text. However, you removed the whole thing. Epicgenius (talk) 18:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Which is reasonable to do, since the entire this was POV/OR, essentially unsourced (the few rferences thrown in supported specific facts but not the conclusions drawn from them, a classic case of WP:SYNTHESIS). This is a contentious subject area, which means that care needs to be taken to support each and every statement with a reference which specifically pertains to that statement. We cannot have such blocks of unsourced personal political analysis in our encyclopedia. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
      • (edit conflict) (2) I didn't analyse the text carefully. I shall do so next time to check for OR and POV text. Epicgenius (talk) 18:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Reverted edit of Hugo Treffner Gymnasium article

Hi! I noticed that you reverted my edit of the Hugo Treffner Gymnasium. I would very much appreciate it if you didn't do so in the future as I am doing this for a research paper as practical work and everything is being done by the instructions of my instructor. If you keep reverting my edits, he will give me a bad grade and I really don't want that to happen. Thanks!

The revert is  Done and I am also editing Wikipedia as part of a school project (on another account). Maybe I can give you some tips... Epicgenius (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Your edit to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Treffner_Gymnasium

Dear Sir,

According to my information, you have edited/deleted parts of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Treffner_Gymnasium I am a teacher at that school and as part of a project, two of our students are working on the article in question. As they have minimal experience on Wikipedia, they may not do everything according to rule, but I can assure you that all the information in that article is based on sound sources. The article will be even more improved in the future. Please do not edit or delete. If you have any suggestions as to how to improve the article, please turn to me.

Thank you for your co-operation! Marcus Hildebrandt marcus.hildebrandt[atttt]htg.tartu.ee Hugo Treffner Gymnasium Tartu, Estonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.250.112.173 (talk) 18:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Good day, Mr. Hildebrandt, and thank you for your post. I was initially concerned that the content that your students added may or may not be suitable for Wikipedia, but I am not going to edit the page anymore; instead, I will let an administrator decide if the content is suitable. If you have any concerns or questions, feel free to reply to me. Thank you. Epicgenius (talk) 18:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Please don't do anything to the article until the end of December. The boys have to present the article as the result of the project to a committee. As they could not possibly comply with all the rules of Wikipedia and publishing articles in the short time given for their project, it would be fair to let them finish the work and not interfere with it any way. Of course, the article need improvement, which can be done in another project. Once again, thank you for your co-operation. Marcus Hildebrandt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.250.112.173 (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I will not edit the article for that time. However, a good idea would be to let them copy and paste the material of the article into their user sandbox at Special:MyPage/sandbox, make the edits to that sandbox, and then present their user sandbox rather than editing the article itself. The latter is likely to be problematic amongst the Wikipedia community. Thank you, Epicgenius (talk) 19:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Epicgenius is correct, and I have left a message on your talk page to the same effect. You cannot, and should not, attempt to prevent other Wikipedia users from editing the article so that your students have exclusive use of it, that's just not how Wikipedia works. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I forwarded your suggestion to the students. I'll let them decide if they want to continue working on the article itself or their draft in the sandbox. Regards, Marcus Hildebrandt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.250.112.173 (talk) 16:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

re: Gary Pilgrim "highly systematic" edit

This is a significant aspect of his investment style, as he was well known for scouring a large universe of stocks and screening them through elaborate filters to select a few. I do not believe this addition is sugar coating, but relevant information.

(edit conflict) Okay, but remember that it has to presented in a neutral way. Epicgenius (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. I would suggest that your rewording is actually less neutral and less informative, however. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.32.99 (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Go ahead and re-edit it. I'm not stopping you. Epicgenius (talk) 20:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks - your vigilance is appreciated!
No problem. Epicgenius (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Derailment article question response

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Daniel Case's talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 22:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I've responded again. Daniel Case (talk) 06:38, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

MagicKirin 11

Why not do something useful and talk to me before assuming I am breaking the rules.74.104.159.130 (talk) 11:15, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Why not read this page first before assuming I'm doing something wrong. Maybe I did, and maybe I may have made a mistake, but you are jumping to conclusions here. Epicgenius (talk) 11:30, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
… And so it turns out, you are indef blocked user MagicKirin. Epicgenius (talk) 19:40, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

University Alliance

Perhaps you could explain this edit, and your repeat of the same unexplained edit. I'm prepared to believe that the University of Portsmouth Wikipedia page and the University's own website are correct. What are your grounds for disbelieving them? - David Biddulph (talk) 16:08, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

There is no reliable source for these changes. Usually, if a name of a person is changed to that of a different person without a source, I revert it. Epicgenius (talk) 16:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
How many entries in that table have sources quoted? You are welcome to add sources to all the entries if you want to do so, or to tag the section as unsourced. Please have the courtesy to look at the page for the university in question before blindly reverting twice. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I will. Epicgenius (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

New Haven Line templates

Hey, you'll want to be a bit more careful with these - New Haven Line traffic routing is incredibly complex and it's not as simple as your diagrams suggest. While MNRR can feel a bit like a subway operation, there's less repeatability. Some stations may never have MNRR express trains on the center tracks - all trains to New Haven, for example, also stop at West Haven, so it'll never have MNRR trains on the center tracks under the current schedule. But that could change with any given schedule. Amtrak trains are also occasionally routed on the outer tracks for various operational purposes - which can change day by day. Additionally, the long-term track closures for the current catenary project (lasting 5+ years) completely throw off any semblance of "normal" routing. Between these three factors, claiming that certain services are going to use certain tracks is basically speculation. I don't think it's fair to show anything more than the physical layout - four tracks, two platforms - unless you have a citable source for more than that.

If you continue northeast, you also will not be able to make any assumptions. Both Shore Line East and MBTA run wrong-rail a lot. Which platform at Guilford, for example, depends on the time of day. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, wow. I did not know that. Thanks for telling me.Epicgenius (talk) 21:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, it's one of those unfortunate things, though not a big deal since we don't want Wikipedia to be a travel guide anyway. Stuff gets really weird in MBTA territory - the Needham Line usually runs on the #3 side track in both directions between South Station and Back Bay, all trains stopping at Ruggles have to be on the #1 (center) or #3 (side) but not #2 (other side) track, the MBTA (95% of the time) uses one platform at Providence and Amtrak the other... Operations gets strange when you can't get up a basic local-express system. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:17, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

RE: Albums you have

Desfado by Ana Moura, but those are all. Which album you are looking for? © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 22:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Right now, I'm not looking for any of the albums, but thanks anyway. Epicgenius (talk) 00:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

James A Bayard the younger

Please cease undoing my edits on this page I am one of the sources and know more about Bayard than probably 100 percent of the American public.

And your source is…? Epicgenius (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Brion McClanahan. Look me up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.38.134.185 (talk) 03:27, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, holding an M.A. and a Ph.D in American history still does not exclude you from having to use references in an article. Wikipedia doesn't care even if you're the most important person in the world—you have to cite sources or you may get reverted. Frankly, I don't really know the truth, so I will have to get a third opinion on this. Epicgenius (talk) 03:31, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

  • Featured content: F*&!

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexandra Escobar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2008 Pan American Championships (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) 11:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

This is a fight that you really don't want.

Hey, Epicgenius. I saw your contributions to the latest Eric Corbett dramafest. I'd recommend that you stay out of it. First and foremost, Eric Corbett dramafests are a regular occurrence on ANI; each side will get their two minutes' hate on the other, things will get said, but it will eventually die down, and there is nothing to say or do that will help the situation. The only thing that commenting will do is hurt people. Second, many of the things you're saying just aren't right. For example, your suggestion that we remove some of Eric's editing rights is wildly inappropriate: we remove access to tools when those tools themselves are misused, not as a general punishment for whenever an editor does something we don't like, or even something that's against the rules. Furthermore, tools and user rights are not "prizes" or "rewards" to be given out or taken away based on merit; they are simply tools to be given out to help people in their work to improve the encyclopedia, and taken away if the people are misusing them. Another example (which perhaps comes from a similar mindset) would be your comment to Boing! said Zebedee: he was an admin, and still could be if he wanted to be one; he retired his admin tools in good standing and could ask for them again if he desires. While I imagine you just didn't know the history behind it, telling him to become an admin is not a cool thing to say, given the circumstances. Again, it'd be better to just stay out of it, though I certainly am not going to stop you if you decide to continue. Just...tread lightly, okay? Writ Keeper  17:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I'll do that. I thought that Boing! said Zebedee was an admin, so I suggested that they should run for adminship again, but not in the negative context. Additionally, I also thought that Eric was abusing his editing rights at first. So yes, I should stay out of it. Epicgenius (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Why did you think that? Eric Corbett 19:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Do you mean, why do I think that B!SZ should re-run for adminship, why do I think that you were abusing your editing rights, or why do I think that I should stay out of the ANI conversation? Epicgenius (talk) 19:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Why did you think I was abusing my editing rights? Eric Corbett 19:17, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
It was because of the issues with civility that you had recently shown. I thought your editing rights had to do with it and I am sorry if they didn't. Epicgenius (talk) 19:19, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
In what way could my editing rights have had anything to do with it? Don't you think it's inherently uncivil to make unwarranted and totally unjustified accusations like that? Eric Corbett 19:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Why don't the two of you go find find something better/more constructive to do? Thomas.W talk to me 19:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Please. These comments were not made out of malice, they were made out of honest ignorance, out of misunderstanding piled on misunderstanding. Let's just let it go. Writ Keeper  19:29, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
@Eric Corbett: Don't you think it's uncivil to curse at people like you did at your talk page? If so, then don't other editors have the rights to be concerned? Epicgenius (talk) 19:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm not the one who was telling lies and trying to mislead people. That would be you. Eric Corbett 19:34, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
You know Corbett, this is getting tiring. I'm not even going to respond to you anymore. Bye. Epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Edits to Allegro Development page

Please undo your edit. The contradict an editorial decision made by Drmies and removed important updated information about Allegro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.197.55 (talk) 15:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then I will ask Drmies. Drmies, what do you think? Epicgenius (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
This was already discussed on User_talk:Drmies#Technopat_reverted_your_edits_on_Allegro_Development_page, and I don't have much to add to that. I might have something to add to the section above this one, but I don't know what good that would do. I think, and I'm speaking as an old, elitist bastard here, that relatively new editors should be wary of jumping into old matters. Mind you, I'm not speaking of you, or not primarily of you. ANI threads turn into drama fests because of snap judgments and accusations and that's never a good thing. As for Allegro, I hope you all are discussing this on the talk page. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I'll look at these. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hugo Treffner Gymnasium

Hi! I noticed that the last edit of our work has been removed from the article again. I was wondering if I could have the script/code of our latest work (with all the tables and links to the pictures and stuff). Putting it all up was a lot of hard work for us and for some unknown reason, I do not have it saved on my computer.

Thanks!

Okay, just copy all of the code in this link. Epicgenius (talk) 15:46, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Santa Claus's reindeer

First of all, it's "team is", "not team are". Secondly, it's traditionally "Donder", not "Donner". And, if you read the article before editing, you would know that.--Asher196 (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Isn't 'reindeer' a plural? And actually, the team are. For example, 'Barcelona FC are a good football team', not 'Barcelona FC is a good football team'. It may very well be the latter here in America, but the rest of the world says the former. And 'Donner' is a very, very common misspelling. Epicgenius (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
The team is singular. One team of reindeer. And Donner is not a misspelling, It is commonly used in the present, but is traditionally Donder. The article makes that point clear.--Asher196 (talk) 16:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
One team, but several separate reindeer. Epicgenius (talk) 16:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
The opening sentence is referring to one team.--Asher196 (talk) 16:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, one team. But what is the team comprising? Eight reindeers. Epicgenius (talk) 16:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
If I may interject: for the general case, this is covered by WP:ENGVAR, which says that you don't get to decide whether the American or non-American spelling is correct and change it to your choice. If there are no strong ties in the article itself (e.g. an article on Winston Churchill would use British conventions, whereas an article on George Washington would use American ones), the style that is used is that of the article's first major author; it should not be changed without a very good reason, no matter what one's feelings on which one is better is. However, in this case it's irrelevant: the subject of the sentence in dispute in this edit is "Santa Claus's reindeer", not "a team of etc. etc.", and since "reindeer" is plural here, the verb needs to be plural as well, to agree with it. Thus, "are" is the right thing. Writ Keeper  17:43, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

un-did edit

Hello. I'm the guy who switch folk music into Gaita Zuliana, but i did that because the article is mostly about Gaita Zuliana, so i think that part should be called Gaita Zuliana. if you can, please keep it to Gaita Zuliana. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.82.67 (talk) 21:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Epicgenius (talk) 21:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
That section is about several different styles of folk music, not just about the Gaita Zuliana, so the heading should read "Folk". As it does now, after I reverted the IPs second attempt to change it. Thomas.W talk to me 21:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
@Thomas.W: I've had to revert them again. Epicgenius (talk) 00:56, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

JetBlue Airways Flight 292

You can't just remove a nominatioh for deletion like that. I am re-openning the discussion !!--Petebutt (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually, since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JetBlue Airways Flight 292 (2nd nomination) had already closed, you were correct to remove the template. I've advised User:Petebutt that if he wants to re-open discussion, he needs to create Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JetBlue Airways Flight 292 (3rd nomination). —C.Fred (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Trouted

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Thank you for not vandalising the article 'Sive (play)'.

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Prince George's Plaza (WMATA station) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • (WMATA station)|Huntington]] or [[Franconia–Springfield (WMATA station)|Franconia–Springfield]])) <small>([[West Hyattsville (WMATA station)|West Hyattsville]])</small>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bukharan Jews may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Arizona|Phoenix]], [[South Florida]], [[Atlanta]], San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Denver). Only a few thousand still remain in [[Uzbekistan]]. About 500 live in Canada (mainly Toronto,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:52, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Death and state funeral of Nelson Mandela may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:58, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Redfield, New York may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • The town unofficially set a record of {{convert|146|in|cm}}) of snow in a week in February 2007.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:57, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to William Goodison (surgeon) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • '''William Goodison''' (alternatively '''Goodisson'''<ref group="note">It is difficult to support which of the two forms of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Retro-futurism may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • models of [[Ford Mustang]], [[Dodge Challenger]], and [[Chevrolet Camaro]]; or the [VW Beetle]] and [[Fiat 500]]. Many more examples exist. Strictly speaking, the trend can be seen more as

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Regarding an edit you made to Garda Operational Support

Hello Epicgenius/Archive/2013,

I noticed you marked an article as a stub using the {{stub}} template. Did you know that there are thousands of stub types that you can use to clarify what type of stub the article is? Properly categorizing stubs is important to the Wikipedia community because it helps various WikiProjects to identify articles that need expansion.

If you have questions about stub sorting, don't hesitate to ask! There is a wealth of stub information on the stub sorting WikiProject, and hundreds of stub sorters. Thanks! --I dream of horses @ 10:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello IDoH, I apologize if the stub templates that I added are too generic. I'll try to classify them further in the future. Thanks, Epicgenius (talk) 13:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. We just had a backlog at Category:Stub, so I thought that maybe informing people of the need to stub-sort beyond {{stub}} might prevent that in the future. --I dream of horses @ 19:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
All right. I'll also check that category out and see what i can do to help. Thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
It's probably empty now. The backlog has been clear for a couple of days. But thanks, anyways. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 18:04, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Peeking Heights

You reverted my merge of Peeking Heights into Chessington World of Adventures Resort - should it not be merged, or should it have been done differently? Thanks. 82.132.235.178 (talk) 18:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it shouldn't have been merged. The Chessington World of Adventures Resort article has a table that provides a 1–2 sentence overview. If you feel that the Peeking Heights article can be explained sufficiently in the Chessington World of Adventures Resort article, feel free to revert my edits. However, generally we keep stub articles like Peeking Heights, unless they are so short that they can be sufficiently mentioned in another article. Your call, although I would recommend not re-merging the two articles. Epicgenius (talk) 18:49, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, appreciate the help. There is absolutely nothing in the Peeking Heights article that isn't already in the Chessington World of Adventures Resort table except the date it opened at Thorpe Park, and that date IS in the similar summary in the Thorpe Park article (I edited both articles beforehand). What do you think? 82.132.235.178 (talk) 19:03, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I've redirected the Peeking Heights article to Chessington World of Adventures Resort, after finding that the entry for Peeking Heights in the latter article was identical to the entire prose of Peeking Heights. Epicgenius (talk) 19:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your help, appreciated. 82.132.235.178 (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

thanks for the barnnstar

thanks for the compliments for fighting vandalism, and (of course) the barnstar you gave me. it's always nice to get some positive feedback Face-smile.svg. about the anti vandal tools available for download, yes i already considered this myself...then again i like to fight vandals old school style. i need to think about that a bit longer ;) . take care, and best regards Stormmeteo Message 18:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I see that you are pretty settled. Good luck, and if you have any questions, you can always ask me or another user who is more experienced than I. Epicgenius (talk) 19:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Article: terminology (software) revising snippet

recently on terminology (software), I noticed your edits including a page redirect. I like the editorial of the youtube link, but the prior one is no longer pointing as a link. I'm not sure if this is intentional or not(I think I reference the same link somewhere in the infobox template) as I'm still not very pro to wiki edits. Let me know if I should revert this line, thanks.

Swestlake (talk) 21:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, about the "Official website" thing, that was my fault. I have fixed it. Epicgenius (talk) 23:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Humour.svg The Barnstar of Good Humor!
Hello Epicgenius/Archive/2013.Recently you have signed my guestbook! Thank you very much for signing my guestbook. Cheers.Face-smile.svg--Pratyya (Hello!) 06:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


PS: Sorry for the late. --Pratyya (Hello!) 06:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

It's okay, thanks! Epicgenius (talk) 13:17, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Revert of "History of video game consoles (eighth generation)"

Hi! You seem to have mistakenly reverted my edits to History of video game consoles (eighth generation). If there is something I did wrong in my edits, please let me know. Thanks!

I have reverted it. Thanks for the heads up. Epicgenius (talk) 15:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

hey

how are you doing. I have a few questions for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.108.184.167 (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

If you are asking about this edit, it was reverted because it looked like vandalism. Adding "no i have never played football" to a football player's article is considered vandalism. Otherwise, what would you like to ask me? Epicgenius (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Would you care to explain yourself?

I'm talking about this of course. Eric Corbett 18:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it's called a 'mistake'. Epicgenius (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Doesn't look like a 'mistake' to me. Eric Corbett 18:23, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I did not look through the article carefully enough. Epicgenius (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

New message

Hi Epicgenius, I am a little confused by a recent reverted edit, labeled at "good faith", which it was, and yet STiki was invoked suggesting that it is vandalism. A student of mine made the change, including a reliable citation - granted he should have created a new section for the information he added, but it is clear it was made in good faith. In looking at the edit it did not match any of the definitions of vandalism by Wikipedia.

Emergency Medical Services (cur | prev) 13:48, 6 December 2013‎ Epicgenius (talk | contribs)‎ . . (71,931 bytes) (-592)‎ . . (Reverted 1 good faith edit by 192.173.161.250 using STiki (Mistake? Report it.)) (undo)

Thank you.

madamsmadam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.39.229.114 (talk) 18:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted the edit in question; however, I will need to ask others' input in this. If a student of yours had made the edit, I suggest that they create an account and use their user sandbox, located at the top right corner of their user profile. If you have any questions, please ask. Thank you.
By the way, STiki, despite being an anti-vandalism tool, only marks suspicious edits, not necessarily vandalistic edits. "In good faith" means that although the edit may have been made with the intent of being constructive, it needs to be reverted due to a problem with the edit (e.g. it introduces bad wikicode into the article, it is unsourced, or (in this case) it contains unencyclopedic details). Epicgenius (talk) 18:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
And please, sign in using your regular Wikipedia account. Epicgenius (talk) 18:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Checkmate

The article Checkmate you nominated as a good article has failed Symbol unsupport vote.svg; see Talk:Checkmate for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 22:23, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

Edit on Venetian Snares

I just undid this edit, which removed essentially correct information (unsourced but sources are easily found, e.g. [2]). It was unclear why you removed the information: your edit summary did not say why. Except for obvious vandalism when reverting edits you should always give a reason. This helps other editors understand why you have done so, in particular it helps the editor you reverted who may be discouraged by their contributions being removed without explanation.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 14:13, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Because it contained the syntax. Epicgenius (talk) 14:15, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
A minor typo/misclick on my part that you beat me to correcting. My message was about your previous edit: [3], for which you gave no reason.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 14:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
At the time, the source was not in the article. Epicgenius (talk) 15:47, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
You did not give this reason in the edit summary. And many articles include unsourced statements. Obvious errors should be removed, but good faith edits by editors, even if they are unexplained, should not just be reverted. If you are unsure what has been added is correct, and cannot verify it yourself, consider tagging it with {{citation needed}}, to encourage other editors to fix it.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC)--
Do you use STiki? If you do, you will notice that they have (1) automatic edit summaries, so I can't change them after the fact; (2) automatic undo (there is no edit interface on STiki; it's either undo the whole thing or keep the whole thing) and (3) very quick editing, so I can make a decision on whether to keep or revert within two seconds. Thank you, Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
You should not blame the tool you use for this. I am not familiar with WP:STiki but looking at that page it says

Sometimes edits are clearly unconstructive, but lack the intent and malice that characterizes vandalism. In these cases, one should assume good faith by undoing the changes using a Good-faith revert. (my emphasis)


The edit you reverted was not 'clearly unconstructive'. Looking at the choices there the correct choice if you are unsure whether an edit is correct is 'pass'. If you find you cannot make a correct decision within two seconds then slow down. There is no deadline--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
I was going to edit the article to make it referenced, but I decided to remove it altogether since it was BLP unsourced. Epicgenius (talk) 18:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Potentially disruptive class project

Seems resolved, for now... GiantSnowman 19:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Walking Dead (TV series)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Walking Dead (TV series). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Levitating

You should not do vandalism-revert if you are not able to recognize vandalism, and you should not revert if you have no understanding in the matter. And if you have you are expected to explain at least in the comment-line. --Itu (talk) 08:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

You should not ask me to stop reverting vandalism if you can't provide a link to where I reverted it. Epicgenius (talk) 13:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
And by the way, your edit here was not vandalism; it was a good-faith revert (meaning that it was not vandalism, but it is not constructive either—a hidden text is not constructive to the article, especially one containing your opinion). I also sent you a notice to take it to the talk page. The article is not called 'levitation'. Epicgenius (talk) 13:11, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
"The article is not called 'levitation'." - what really dumb "argument". And also there is nothing with opinon here. It was a 95% probable right clarification, just to be confirmed by a coming author with real knowledge on the topic. Please refrain from reverting edit if you are not able to understand them. --Itu (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Again, the edit was just a hidden comment, and not constructive. Please tell me, what visible changes came with your edit? Epicgenius (talk) 17:55, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Archer Avenue Line at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 08:28, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elmhurst, Queens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blue Bloods (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) 09:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

"Knockout (non-violent game)"

Don't make silly moves like that again.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is it silly? "Non-violent" qualifies "game". Epicgenius (talk) 15:39, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Because it is unnecessary to disambiguate it. It is a game called "knockout". Also "Knockout (violent game)" is a poor title under discussion, because it is being referred to universally as "the knockout game". Also, there is no need for the hatnote directing people to Knockout (game) at Knockout (violent game) at this time, particularly one that does not refer to it as violent or non-violent, but rather "Knockout (game)" being about a game played with a basketball.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:42, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
There are two games named "Knockout": The violent game and the…um…other game. The other game is non-violent in relation to the other, violent, Knockout game. The violent game may be confused with the non-violent game due to the title of the latter saying "Knockout (game)". I am pretty sure that some people researching that game where teenagers punch people in the head do not want to be confused with the game where a basketball is used. Thus, the hatnote. Epicgenius (talk) 15:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
You do not understand how hatnotes are meant to work. They are only necessary if the titles of the page is remotely similar and the former might be confused for the latter. No one going to Knockout (violent game) meant to go to Knockout (game). A hatnote might be useful at "Knockout (game)" to direct people to "Knockout (violent game)", but certainly the opposite is not true at all. Also, your qualification of the two article subjects are also flawed. "Knockout (game)" should not be referred to as a "non-violent game". It should be referred to as a "basketball game" (if the page doesn't get deleted because honestly it's crap and completely unsourced). The page currently titled "Knockout (violent game)" (the name is under discussion currently) should not be referred to as a "violent game" simply because that's what the disambiguator says it is. It should be described as what the page says it is or not at all. I'm sure there's a hatnote template that says "Not to be confused with X". Again, there is no reason to move Knockout (game) anywhere just because there's now Knockout (violent game) and when you are reverted once you do not begin an edit war and revert the other party just because you disagree with their reasoning. You must start up a thread on the talk page of the article to raise the issue for discussion. So do not restore the hatnote at Knockout (violent game) again unless a consensus forms on the talk page of the article saying it might be of some use.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, but still, you reverted some of my legitimate edits. So be careful. I will discuss the matter on the relevant article talk page. And this is controversial because…? Epicgenius (talk) 15:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if it's controversial or not. The fact is someone (in this case me) disagreed with it.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:00, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Controversial or not, if five million people agreed with you, you still could be wrong. Epicgenius (talk) 16:05, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't matter. You added it. I disagreed with the addition. I reverted it. You disagree with me. You start a thread on the talk page about it. You do not reinstate the edit because you disagreed with the reason I gave for the revert. That is edit warring.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:38, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Getting started on Wikipedia

Hi EpicGenius,

I'm wanting to make lots of additions to different articles but I'm finding it difficult to find articles to edit. I'm researching finance news but then find out the people don't have a Wikipedia article.

What's the best way to make a lot of edits and really help out? I know there are Wiki projects but don't know how to get involved. I also want to create some pages for important finance figures, do you have any advice?

Thanks,

Economics-NYU (talk)Economics-NYC

Hello Economics-NYU, if you would like to create pages, you can use WP:Article wizard or WP:AFC. If you wish, you can sign up for Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance; there are instructions there on how to sign up. If you would like to revert vandalism, install WP:TW after you have 4 days and ten edits, and eventually you can file a request for rollback. That's the short version, but I hope you like WIkipedia and decide to continue editing. Thanks, Epicgenius (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

What is the idea of thanking me for my edit and reverting it?

What is the idea of thanking me for my edit of Duon and reverting it?CountMacula (talk) 17:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I thanked you for your edit because it was in good faith. Then, I reverted it because your revision, whilst in good faith, was wrong. I apologise if I have offended you. Epicgenius (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


Scientology edits

Hi Epic, u´ve deleted a couple of editions in the article of scientology, i think it might be a mistake, the edits are confirmed, but i guess i should get better reference than the Telegraph, i´ve haven´t found legal paper yet.--Euroescritor (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah… the Telegraph is known to contain the opinions of its author. It's a tabloid, basically. A better source is advised. Epicgenius (talk) 19:31, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Sharing information for charity: water page

Hi Epicgenius,

I'm a new wikipedia user and I work for charity: water.

I noticed that you had recently edited the charity: water page, so thought I'd reach out to let you know I shared some press articles on the talk page that could be used to update and improve the article.

You can see them here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Charity:_water#Information_for_updates_from_Independent_sources

I will not edit the page personally as I work for charity: water and hence have a conflict-of-interest, but I hope the independent articles can help improve the page.

Best,

Paull Young — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paullyoungcw (talkcontribs) 19:28, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

All right, I'll pass the message on. Epicgenius (talk) 19:31, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Deoxyribonuclease I

This edit looks legit to me. The contribution perhaps needs to be moved to a different section, but the contribution looks relevant to the article. Thanks. Boghog (talk) 22:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Noted. I will re-add it. Epicgenius (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Your 'good faith' reverts

Unfortunately you didn't get the most important point in the section I started above. Going by other editors posts since, and a quick review of your contribution record, you still seem to be misusing the revert feature of STiki. Its non-vandalism reverts are only supposed to be used for edits that are "clearly unconstructive" (from Wikipedia:STiki#Using STiki). That means things like test edits, using WP for self promotion or as social media, unexplained blanking, adding non-English text. But it doesn't include attempts to improve the encyclopaedia which could be valid if only they were e.g. properly sourced, or cleaned up.

You might take a look at Twinkle which I use. This offers you three options on reverting: revert vandalism, neutral revert, and good faith revert. For the latter two it asks you for a reason which is included in the edit summary. It only takes a few seconds to type the reason but it's important to other editors, especially the editor being reverted. One key WP guideline is Please do not bite the newcomers, which means they should be treated with extra care, so if their edits are objectionable it should be explained to them.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 00:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I already use Twinkle. It is a good tool, but you have to search out the vandalism manually and painstakingly. With Twinkle, you get about 20 reverts per hour, if you are lucky. Epicgenius (talk) 00:15, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
You didn't address my concern at all. And since my comment many more editors have come here disputing your reverts. My worry is this is only the tip of the iceberg. New users unfamiliar with WP, and edit summaries and histories, may just see their changes undone without knowing why. Even if they find the edit summary it gives no indication of the reason for reversion. So for every dozen editors posting here (and there have been dozens just this month) a hundred or more may be simply discouraged and leave. Further you are often reverting edits which do not deserve it: that are correct and add valuable content, though they may need copy editing or sourcing.
One key guideline (key as we all benefit from it at some point) is please do not bite the newcomers. Reverting correct edits, or even well-meant ones without giving a reason, is against both the spirit and the letter of this guideline. Please look at your reverts and consider them from the point of view of the editor being reverted. If the problem is with your tools then stop using them: they are not a panacea and not suited to every task. It may take more time to provide a proper edit summary, or to properly deal with a constructive edit, but that is never an excuse not to do so.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:25, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
@JohnBlackburne: I have a page that deals with the mistakes I have made, and that page deals with the reasons why I may have reverted. See this. Epicgenius (talk) 01:28, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
That is not enough. Here is the the guideline I linked to
  • Always explain reverts in the edit summary, and use plain English rather than cryptic abbreviations.
Your Terms and Conditions fails on two points; it's not in the edit summary and it doesn't explain as it's far too general: a new editor reading it, even if they notice the link, will have little idea which of the many things listed triggered the revert. It also doesn't excuse incorrect reverts. You're not a new editor yourself, you should not be repeatedly making mistakes, especially when dealing with other editors' contributions.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 02:06, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
I joined in late 2012. You've been editing far longer than I have. I am still learning many of the Wikipedia policies myself. But it's all right, I will heed these words. Besides, the link is in my talk page notice, so anyone who edits my talk page will notice it. Epicgenius (talk) 02:41, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Reverting my edit

Why did you revert my edit? I added an example of a characters laugh after a mention of her distinguished laugh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ck920 (talkcontribs) 02:46, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I will not go into detail about the problems that this causes for people who are hard of hearing / deaf. I have reverted your edit because it is not an encyclopaedic detail. While this may well be what the distinguished laugh sounds like, this borders on original research and trivia. Epicgenius (talk) 02:50, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Duon

Hmm, is your revert too quick, or not a proper remedy ? A small quandary -- you reverted duon, but neither article references this term, not the boss "duon" nor the recent genetic revelation of dual purpose codons. Should duon be a disambig and how should it be implemented, proper references really are needed in the respective articles so that where ever duon links to, at least it lands somewhere with some information.

It should be a disambiguation page, as there are now two things that mention "duon": Duon on the Super Mario Bros. wiki, and the genetics-related "duon". That way, there will be no revert warring. Epicgenius (talk) 14:15, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Humour Hires.png The Barnstar of Good Humor
Thanks for signing my guestbook! Jianhui67 talkcontribs 12:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

10th Avenue Station

http://www.mta.info/capconstr/sas/index.html This link on the MTA website shows the unfunded Second Avenue Subway stations are still proposed, and there is a possibility they will be built in the future. http://web.mta.info/capital/future/extension.php This link, the home page for the 7 line extension, makes no mention of the 10th Avenue station, making it very unlikely that it will be built. Mysteryman557 (talk) 16:49, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

  • Yes, but there is a very high demand for the Tenth Avenue station. There is less demand for the 14 other SAS stations. The 7 Subway Extension will open in June 2014 and be complete by December 2015. The first stations of the SAS will not be open until December 2016, and there is a much lower chance that the rest of the SAS stations would be built, due to the MTA's budgetary constraints. It is more likely that the MTA would build a station where the framework is already there (in the 7 line extension), than it is for the MTA to create a brand-new tunnels for the SAS. Epicgenius (talk) 16:51, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Ben Gurion Airport

All Sun d'Or's destinations are operated by El Al by Sun d'Or brand. So i just moved it up to El Al's destinations under Sun d'Or brand. --Friends147 (talk) 17:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

  • Okay, thanks for the explanation. Epicgenius (talk) 18:02, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

William Goodison (1785-1836)

Dear Epicgenius,

Thank you very much for your suggetsions and kindness to my first contribution to english Wikipedia.

I thought it would be better to title William Goodisons entries with the years of birth-death in barckets. William Goodison (1785-1836) for the assistant surgeon and William Goodison (1876-1928) for the Canadian politician. Alternatively, the politician could be titled William T. Goodison.

What do you think? Best wishes NikosActia Nicopolis (talk) 18:42, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

It would be easier to say "William Goodison (surgeon)". This title shows that Goodison's line of work is that of a surgeon. "William Goodison (1785–1836)", while extremely specific, is not exactly the best choice for article title; please see this Wikipedia policy for a reason why. Epicgenius (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you for the kind welcoming and suggestions. Actia Nicopolis (talk) 20:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Epicgenius (talk) 23:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Sharon Osbourne

Well done for re-instating Sharon Osbourne's incorrect birth name and place. Bravo.

92.8.19.255 (talk) 16:25, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then. What is the 'correct' birth name and place as you say? Do you have a reliable source proving that your edit was correct, or are you just saying this for the sake of doing so? Epicgenius (talk) 17:12, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
The correct details are as per my edit that you reverted. The fact that her father's real name was Harry Levy and that there are no birth records for a Sharon Rachel Arden in 1952 but for a Sharen R Levy are proof enough. UK birth record and The Biography Channel I would assume were reliable sources. I would also point out that the birth name of Sharon Rachel Arden and birth place of Brixton are currently unreferenced, as it uses a dead link to the Biography Channel website which actually gives the correct birth surname as Levy. The birth record confirms area of London born as being Westminster. 92.8.19.255 (talk) 21:43, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
This still does not tell me how Osbourne's maiden name was Levy. Epicgenius (talk) 22:09, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Mike Yeager

  • Notice the citation at the end of this sentence: "As of the conclusion of the 2012 season, this ranks him #21 at Carthage in total wins and #21 at the school in winning percentage (.000)." (The citation is that superscript number in brackets).
  • Click on the superscripted number.
  • Now click on the linked source ("Carthage Redmen").
  • Read the source.
  • Go to the last line of the table, where Mike Yeager is listed.
  • What does it say?
  • Now explain why you keep reverting a perfectly good update.
  • Apologize.
  • Fix the Yeager article so the stats are up to date.

70.134.229.223 (talk) 14:27, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I will try not to laugh as I look at the data table and see that the math does not add up at all. And you had to go and post on the reliable sources noticeboard… Epicgenius (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Request For Deletion

This template Template:NYCS Platform Layout IND Queens Boulevard Line/local/without mezzanine should be deleted. All NYC subway stations have mezzanines, which is where the Metrocard vending machines are located, even if it is on the same level as the platform level. Mysteryman557 (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Not all NYC subway stations (City Hall (BMT Broadway Line) is a notable example, and some elevated and at-grade stations have their fare control on platform or street level, so they are not actual mezzanine levels) but I will put in a MfD request anyway. Epicgenius (talk) 02:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
It actually does, the mezzanine at that station is in the middle of the platform on the same level as that platform, but I appreciate your agreement. Also, I am thinking of reprogramming the Queens Boulevard template for the fourth avenue stations and using the Fulton street template for local stations east of Forest Hills. Mysteryman557 (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Actually, since the stations 75th Avenue (IND Queens Boulevard Line) and Briarwood – Van Wyck Boulevard (IND Queens Boulevard Line) have custom station layouts, maybe it's fine to put the former in a template all on their own, and the latter in a template along with Sutphin Boulevard (IND Queens Boulevard Line) and 169th Street (IND Queens Boulevard Line). Epicgenius (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

Hi Epicgenius. You're the only non-involved editor who responded to my request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive822#Disruptive editing by User:QuackGuru so far; however, your comment has been kind of short... Any way you could elaborate a little? Not questioning your negative reply, just trying to understand a little better how the system works. Thanks, --Mallexikon (talk) 03:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

@Mallexikon: I was thinking, maybe you should stay away from QuackGuru as much as possible, since they seem to be aggravating you. I did not intend it to be a negative reply, so I apologize if it sounded like one. Epicgenius (talk) 13:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect rollback

What I wrote about the stipends is legally and morally correct. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stipend&oldid=585600269&diff=prev

But not grammatically correct. Epicgenius (talk) 13:37, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!!!!

The Herald's Autograph Barnstar.png Planet Herald's Guestbook Barnstar
Thank you for signing my guestbook......
Happy editing!!!

With love,
Herald talk with me

Thank you! Epicgenius (talk) 16:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Delete

can you delete Ganzhou Uyghur Kingdom page?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.209.191.246 (talk) 00:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, no can do, I am not an administrator. (Wish I was, though... Face-smile.svg Anyway, I just requested deletion. Epicgenius (talk) 00:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, well, I've declined it; A3 doesn't count when an article had content but has since been blanked. Might want to take it to AfD instead; I don't think any CSD criteria will fit. Writ Keeper  01:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
The article doesn't seem like it is in need for deletion anyway. it just needs a whole lot of cleanup. Epicgenius (talk) 01:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Times Square – 42nd Street (New York City Subway) formatting

Thanks for cleaning up the formatting I'd accidentally messed up. I thought that the {{-}} templates were associated with the galleries I removed. It looks better after your fix. Pburka (talk) 04:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

@Pburka: No problem, I'm glad to have helped. Epicgenius (talk) 04:22, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Jung Myung seok article

Epicgenius: Recently you made a change to the JMS article. Thereafter some additional editting was made by Macauthor which appears to include primary sources ie sermons etc. My understanding is that according to BLP rules that is permissible as long as it not self flattering and does not comprises the bulk of the article. Sam Sailor has sent the article to an old version undoing macauthors work. Could you weigh in on this mess?MrTownCar (talk) 12:41, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect Template

This template Template:NYCS Complex Layout Fulton Center is incorrect. The "J" train"Z" train platform is backwards. It should be like it is in this template. Mysteryman557 (talk) 16:28, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

The correction is  Done Epicgenius (talk) 16:41, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Question...

  • Yeah, I guess that was an error. Things don't go well when I copy and paste the whole page instead of just re-adding my comment… Epicgenius (talk) 11:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

Re:

It was merely coincidence. You sorta have to cover those articles if you're trying to make the coverage of certain things occuring on December 31 on Wikipedia a bit more tolerable. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:41, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: All right. Anyway, I'm probably going to work on some of the Times Square/New Year's related articles.Epicgenius (talk) 15:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update

I now realize this was an error on my part due to incorrect information. Thank you for catching this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsu1997 (talkcontribs) 16:30, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I apologize, as I thought at first that it was vandalism due to the unsourced. Epicgenius (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Boreal Loppet

Hi. I've declined your speedy as the article is quite coherent. It's in French, that's all... It could be notable, so I've given some advice to the author (and a telling off for beating me to the button in removing the tag...) and tagged it for various things. Peridon (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

@Peridon: My apologies. I intended to press the "Need translation" button on Twinkle, but somehow I ended up on the CSD list instead. Epicgenius (talk) 19:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
'S OK. I thought it was odd for you to be that far out... Peridon (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess I wasn't paying much attention. Face-smile.svg Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Seven Heavens

Hi, Just to let you know that there were no vandalism in my edit of Seven Heavens#Qur.27an contrary to what you pretend using StiKi. Please verify my additional quotes a second time and decide wisely. Thanks for your comprehension ! Happydit (talk) 19:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll re-review it. Personal attacks aren't going to help your case, however. Epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
@Happydit: As a matter of fact, it wasn't vandalism, but it was an unencyclopedic Qur'an quote. I had my reasons to remove it, as it provided no added value to the article itself. Epicgenius (talk) 19:45, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
You could keep it and tag the article as unencyclopedic to invite more improvements instead of a radical solution as removing my modifications. You didn't even express sorry for prentending vandalism ! Happydit (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
I recommend that you calm down and then edit the article again. It wasn't vandalism, it was unencyclopedic material. Besides, I can't tag the article as unencyclopedic, as there is no tag that I know of that does this. It is more effective to just remove the material altogether. Epicgenius (talk) 19:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter • 19 December 2013

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked on some toolbar improvements, fixing bugs, and improving support for Indic languages as well as other languages with complex characters. The current focus is on improving the reference dialog and expanding the new character inserter tool.

There have been dozens of changes since the last newsletter. Here are some of the highlights:

  • Rich copying and pasting is now available. If you copy text from another website, then character formatting and some other HTML attributes are preserved. This means, for example, that if you copy a pre-formatted suggested citation from a source like this, then VisualEditor will preserve the formatting of the title in the citation. Keep in mind that copying the formatting may include formatting that you don't want (like section headings). If you want to paste plain, unformatted text onto a page, then use Control+⇧ Shift+V or ⌘ Command+⇧ Shift+V (Mac).
  • Auto-numbered external links like [4] can now be edited just like any other link. However, they cannot be created in VisualEditor easily.
  • Several changes to the toolbar and dialogs have been made, and more are on the way. The toolbar has been simplified with a new drop-down text styles menu and an "insert" menu. Your feedback on the toolbar is wanted here. The transclusion/template dialog has been simplified. If you have enabled mathematical formula editing, then the menu item is now called the formula editor instead of LaTeX.
  • There is a new character inserter, which you can find in the new "insert" menu, with a capital Omega ("Ω"). It's a very basic set of characters. Your feedback on the character inserter is wanted here.
  • Saving the page should seem faster by several seconds now.
  • It is now possible to access VisualEditor by manually editing the URL, even if you are not logged in or have not opted in to VisualEditor normally.  To do so, append ?veaction=edit to the end of the page name.  For example, change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random?veaction=edit to open a random page in VisualEditor.  This is intended to support bug testing across multiple browsers, without requiring editors to login repeatedly.

Looking ahead: The transclusion dialog will see further changes in the coming weeks, with a simple mode for single templates and an advanced mode for more complex transclusions. The new character formatting menu on the toolbar will get an arrow to show that it is a drop-down menu. The reference dialog will be improved, and the Reference item will become a button in the main toolbar, rather than an item in the Insert menu.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your RfA support! Things didn't work out, but I appreciate your support! I took your advice, and will try to make a better attempt sometime after the holidays. be well. :) --Sue Rangell 20:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

@Sue Rangell: Glad to help, and have a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Epicgenius (talk) 20:41, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Talk:PINK de Thierry/GA2 abandoned?

It has been over four weeks since the second opinion you requested was given on this nomination, which agreed that the nomination should not be listed at this time. There have been minimal edits to the article in the interim. Please take some action on this when next you're editing. If you haven't responded here or on the nomination template within 24 hours of your next edit, the nomination will be closed as unsuccessful. Thank you for your attention to this matter. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:46, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I will close it. Epicgenius (talk) 00:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Your recent warning to 50.195.17.73

I noticed you left a level 3 vandalism warning at 50.195.17.73 for this edit to Mammoth Cave National Park: [5].

The level 3 warning is too harsh for the edit you reverted. The edit in question seems to be a test edit, so I am reverting your warning and leaving {{Uw-test1}} in its place. Please remember to assume good faith, especially when dealing with IPs and new users. Regards, -- Ross HillTalkNeed Help? • 22:35, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

@Ross Hill: Thanks for reverting the edit on the IP editor's talk page, but the STiki software marks it as vandalism automatically, even though the button on the STiki interface says "Vandalism/Test edit". I could not change the warning beforehand, due to the fact that it was marked automatically. Epicgenius (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the fast response, Epicgenius. In fact, I run STiki and I can choose between whether to mark the edit as good faith or vandalism. Make sure you are running the latest version of STiki. Simply click Good Faith Revert, instead of Vandalism (Undo) when reverting test edits. Thanks, -- Ross HillTalkNeed Help? • 05:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
@Ross Hill: I'll update my STiki version right now. Epicgenius (talk) 13:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Bodystocking

I don't know of a written source, my edit was based on personal experience. Donnanz (talk) 17:14, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then it falls under Wikipedia:OR. It can still be inserted into the article. However, the statement may be deleted again without a reliable source. Epicgenius (talk) 17:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
I can't be bothered now, there's far too much hassle. Donnanz (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
OK, then. Feel free to re-add it. Epicgenius (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Can't unblock you

It's already cleared. Ran out nearly 18 hours ago. Peridon (talk) 18:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

@Peridon: I have replied on the alt account talk page. Epicfailure 2 (talk) 18:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

sevelamer edits

I'm not sure why you feel the need to change the topic sevelamer. Do you know anything about it? I'm one of the co-inventors and have worked with it for the past twenty years at every company I listed (GelTex, Genzyme, Sanofi-Aventis, and Sanofi).

I do not believe that anything I wrote is incorrect, and it is much clearer and more informative than what you reverted to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandyHF (talkcontribs) 19:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

@RandyHF: Are you also the editor 66.30.192.22? The version that you reverted to was missing some internal article links, so I had reverted it. Epicgenius (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

HPV rolled back edit.

The latest data on HPV testing in cervical cancer prevention programs has been published in the lancet. This meta analysis of the largest (independent i.e. Non corporate funded) randomised studies to date in screening populations is considered the definitive research on HPV testing in cervical cancer prevention, it is not controversial and it supports all the evidence preceding it.

In addition to the above, important (again independent) research has shown that HPV tests that (to date) have not been researched in population based screening programmes cannot be assumed to behave in the same way as the tests that have been studied in large randomised independent studies. The implications of this new research are important as it shows that use of these tests can result in over treatment for cervical cancer ( which in itself carries risks).

I am not sure why you consider this research unhelpful. Both papers are highly commended among the experts in this field.

My other change was to include the technical name of the most commonly used test worldwide by name (Hybrid Capture 2, commonly refereed to as HC2 in the large randomised studies). It is important that readers make the connection between the evidence references and the aditorial on the Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.75.106 (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

You accidentally added some wrong formatting to the article. I have fixed it. Epicgenius (talk) 14:37, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy holidays

JianhuiMobile talk 07:34, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Epicgenius (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia message

I was checking my spam folder this morning, and came across an email from you. I deleted it unread, but I assume it was either the same, or similar to, the message you posted to me here on Wikipedia.

I know my computer was hacked before, and from the sluggish way it operates, I assume it still is. And I suspect you are the person who hacked it. I don’t know how else you were able to read the message I sent to Kayou regarding Pinethicket. The fact that my computer identified your email as spam also makes me suspicious.

If I am mistaken, I apologize. If I am not, I ask you to leave me alone.

I am a senior citizen. My only income is Social Security, and my only luxury is my computer, which was a gift from my former employer when I retired. I could not afford a computer otherwise.

I would take my computer in to be repaired, and hopefully rid it of you or whoever has hacked it, but I can’t afford to do that. I can barely afford to buy food. So, once again, I appeal to your sense of decency, if you have any, and ask you to leave me alone.

````Ikallicrates — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikallicrates (talkcontribs) 09:59, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

@Ikallicrates: Unfortunately, I never sent an email to you. Usually, I only send emails to users using the "email this user" link on the left side, under "Tools". If you are getting emails, I suggest you go to Special:Preferences and click the "Notifications" tab on the top right, and uncheck the "Email" box next to "Mention", since you seem to have gotten an email whenever I mention you on Wikipedia. I was able to read the message that you sent Kayau only because you posted on his talk page, which is visible for everyone to see. However, if you click that "email this user" link, you can send a private email to him. I hope that your computer is fixed, and that you have a merry Christmas. Best wishes, Epicgenius (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
@Ikallicrates: "And I suspect you are the person who hacked it" It isn't good etiquette to accuse someone, whom you have never talked to (or even met) until today, of hacking into your computer. Saying "I appeal to your sense of decency, if you have any" is not assuming good faith. Best, Epicgenius (talk) 22:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Seasonal Greetings

Wikipedia Happy New Year.png Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2017!

Hello {{SUBST:BASEPAGENAME}}, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2017.
Happy editing,
~~~~

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thanks! Epicgenius (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

User:Sportsguy17/Happy Holidays 2013

Thanks! Epicgenius (talk) 14:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Education Achievement Authority

You made 2 edits inappropriately to the Education Achievement Authority. You tagged one as "not needed" when if you when through to the "see also" wikilinked article Financial emergency, you would have found the article that Emergency manager should have been linked to (which some how was turned into a red link). Emergency manager is a main component of the "Financial emergency in Michigan" article so is "needed". Spshu (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

My bad, I have fixed the link. The article must have been vandalized. Epicgenius (talk) 18:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey

I appreciate the gesture, but I don't do Christmas, Easter, or any of the other things of that religion. Thank you just the same. DS (talk) 23:03, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

@DragonflySixtyseven: I respect your decisions, and will not leave you any religion-related notifications in the future. Happy New Year (that certainly isn't religious, is it?), Epicgenius (talk) 23:09, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
You're correct; it's not. Thank you very much, and the same to you. DS (talk) 23:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Ethically (Yours) 05:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that wish too, I'm sorry I couldn't gift that "WikiLove" to you on the first hand, but here you take one. Ethically (Yours) 05:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Epicgenius (talk) 17:01, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Edits to S.H. Rider High School

Would you please explain the revert of my edits you made on the S.H. Rider High School article? Thank you, Leo A. Mercer (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I have to side with Lamerceron this one, Epicgenius. Their edit was not at all vandalism, so you cannot use your rollbacker user-right to revert it. I imagine you reverted because of their use of a Wikipedia page as a reference. If that's the case, you should have manually removed that reference instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water by reverting the entire contribution. -- Ross HillTalkNeed Help? 19:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
My apologies, both of you. I have fixed up the parts of the article that were wrong. Epicgenius (talk) 21:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you to Epicgenius for the fix. And thank you to Ross Hill for your information about not linking to a Wikipedia article. I didn't know I couldn't do that. Thank you very much to both of you! Leo A. Mercer (talk) 22:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

You might have the skills to moderate an editing conflict over Great Chinese Famine

Great Chinese Famine has been continually edited by User talk:Oldhand 12, who was recently blocked for seven days for edit warring, and has now resumed a determined effort to impose his view of events without discussion. I would be interested to hear from you. --Greenmaven (talk) 07:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do to help. Epicgenius (talk) 14:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

But Father Jack does say DRINK!!! It is not vandalism!!

I'm only summing up a whole a Paragraph in one word. --The 29th Earl of Grimsby (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2013 (UTC) (stricken out as vandalism) Epicgenius (talk) 19:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Philoumenos of Jacob's Well

Quoting your FAQ: "Most edits should be properly cited, sourced and referenced."

The original page, before your deletion, of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philoumenos_of_Jacob%27s_Well

that is the mention of the Zionist perpetrators, was true. The claim is sourced, as provided in the article.

Why I feel strongly about it? Myself I was on the very spot there, and I talked to the current archimandrite. (I had not known about this murder at all before entering the church by chance). I could not believe it, as it was so shocking, so I did secondary research about this crime in Israel. It did indeed happen as described.

Do not vandalize this article further. If you feel that the current sources about these Jewish religious murderers are incomplete, say so in the note, and I or other wikipedians will spend the time again providing better refs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zezen (talkcontribs) 19:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Me, vandalizing the article? If anything, the other editor "vandalized" the article. Even then, that edit was made in good faith. It was reverted because it had bad grammar, and the edit you made just now has little to do with my revert. Epicgenius (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for not removing this content again and the kind words on my talk page. FYI, I had invested some hours trying to find the deleted Reuters article, books, etc., so I am happy that the content remains there (at least for now).
Happy NYE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zezen (talkcontribs) 18:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Same to you, Epicgenius (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

Reverted article / Le testament

Hi, and let say first, happy new year!.

I just noticed that you reverted my change as in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Le_Testament&oldid=584420801

May I point that unless legitimated this reversion is without any proof whereas I'm doubting seriously that this can be an original handwriting of Le Testament?

As mentionned in the article'talk this scanned text doesn't seem to be part anywhere of Le Testament, in any printed edition, whereas I know that Kungliga biblioteket in Stockholm, is supposed to hold some François Villon handwriting, supposed again to be inherited from François Ier. But for sure I may be wrong.

Nevertheless, adding supposed to a declaration without any reference seems to me, say, fair...

Any further information you may have about this would be of real interest to me. Meanwhile, I'm letting the article as-is.

Well cheers!

Yes, but the article doesn't say that Le Testament "was a supposed collection of poetry". Unless there is proof that the poetry is only "supposed", there's no source that this is either real or fake. I will need a third opinion on this. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey! I'm not challenging at all the fact that François Villon was a poet, a real one, marking the difference between old and middle french (I eventually completed part of the french edition of wikipedia about its writings). I'm challenging the fact that the showned scanned image is from any part of Le Testament. Again, this scanned image doesn't seem to appear in any printed edition of FV... Thus, supposed. Altough I'm not totally & really aware of Netiquette herein, I would have supposed that unless a reference clearly showing that this is part of it, it should be taken very carefully. And, sorry for my poor english skills. Chefdegare (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
It is okay, and I will revert my edit. Epicgenius (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
OK, looking to highest quality image of the mentionned image, I finally matched this to the first four strophes of Le Testament. Thus it is really realated to this poem. I was wrong :-) Although it is most probably not handwriting from François Villon itself due to title...Chefdegare (talk) 22:31, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
All right, I guess you can add that to the article. Do be sure to read WP:V first, however. Thanks, Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Done this. Hope I'm not too bad in English writing... Chefdegare (talk) 22:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Looks good. Epicgenius (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2014 (UTC)