User talk:Frmorrison

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

Welcome!

Hello, Frmorrison, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  --Eurocopter tigre 11:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Add sources
Samsung Electronics
ESlick
Samsung Galaxy Note Edge
Motorola Mobility
Cleanup
Smartphone patent wars
Issuu
Expand
Mobile operating system
TouchWiz
Unencyclopaedic
8tracks.com
Shredded wheat
Highway revolts
Wikify
Exynos
Nokia N9
Orphan
Malvertisement
Stub
Galaxy Apps
Samsung Knox
Angry Birds Stella (TV series)
Samsung Papyrus
Samsung Galaxy Duos

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:49, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


JSTOR cleanup drive[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

Hello TWL users! We hope JSTOR has been a useful resource for your work. We're organizing a cleanup drive to correct dead links to JSTOR articles – these require JSTOR access and cannot easily be corrected by bot. We'd love for you to jump in and help out!


See the list


Sent of behalf of Nikkimaria for The Wikipedia Library's JSTOR using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

chip vs processor[edit]

I answered in my Talk page. Thanks for reaching out! -- Henriok (talk) 18:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

You seems to have misinterpreted my answer. -- Henriok (talk) 10:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Speedy deletion nomination of File:IPhone 7 Cameras.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:IPhone 7 Cameras.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [1], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

  • state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
  • add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ho Tuan Kiet (talk) 15:48, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Google Germany listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Google Germany. Since you had some involvement with the Google Germany redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Pong prototype.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Pong prototype.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Your feedback requested re major changes to Cannabis in the United States[edit]

Please see: Talk:Cannabis_in_the_United_States#Proposing_bold_changes_at_Cannabis_in_the_United_States

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:42, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Your edits on Computer mouse[edit]

Before you edit an article, it is good practice to first read the attached citations. This would have verified your claims as wrong. Schily (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2016 (UTC) And BTW: isn't it better to discuss things on the talk page than to edit articles? Schily (talk) 11:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

The talk page on an article is for when you want input from others, such as renaming the article. In the computer mouse's case, the 1968 claim of a mouse is merely supported by a picture of the Rollkugel mouse in a magazine, but the only actual mouse hardware is from 1972. It is possible the mouse was made back in '68, but a picture is not proof of a working mouse. You will need to find better a citation (that possibly does not exist) than an IT article showing a magazine picture to verify a claim of the '68 mouse. There is no question of the '72 mouse, since there are four trackballs in the Munich Leibniz Computing museum. --Frmorrison (talk) 17:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
A device designed for a military 3D RADAR system was not delivered until 4 years after the product was announced for delivery? That's a real strange guess. I hope you realize that the Engelbart mouse from 1968 was a fretwork while the Telefunken mouse at the same time was made as zinc die casting and the mechanics was using professional optical rotary position encoders. Anyway, the information about the Telefunken mouse was published two months before the Engelbart demo and thus the scientific honor belongs to Rainer Mallebrein and Telefunken Schily (talk) 10:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
There is proof a Telefunken computer was delivered in 1968, but the mouse was described in the German magazine as optional. Merely showing a picture and the description of a mouse in a magazine does not count for inventing something, while it is strong evidence it is not proof. --Frmorrison (talk) 16:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Yesterday, I contacted Reiner Mallebrein. He is currently preparing a talk for a 50 years of Mouse even in Stuttgart. He promised to answer my questions next week. Schily (talk) 15:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

DS/1RR alert on Donald Trump[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Greetings Frmorrison! This is a courtesy notice whereby, on potentially contentious politics pages, you should not re-instate an edit that has been reverted by someone else. As it happens, your change of Donald Trump's net worth according to Forbes is unwarranted. You are probably misreading the referenced source, which says that $3.7 billion is a "real time" net worth whereas their 2016 Billionaires value was $4.5 billion, and that is the one we have consensus to keep (see Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 31#Moratorium on constantly updating Forbes' ranking). Probably this will be updated when Forbes publishes its 2017 annual update. According to the WP:DS rules in force, I am prohibited from reverting you a second time, but I would suggest that you change the number back to $4.5 billion as a self-revert, which doesn't count against your daily WP:1RR quota. Kind regards, — JFG talk 23:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Re-remove[edit]

Hi, I noticed too late that you undid my edit, so I re-undid it. However, I let it stand in the removed state, both per WP:NOT, as well as WP:EL, as well as the template instructions (even before I upgraded them), twitter accounts are not to be mentioned when the official site is already there. In fact, none of the further social networking sites should be there when the official site is already there (with very limited exceptions, see WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. That disqualifies both these twitter accounts, even if they are official. Note as well, that one of the two twitters is the twitter of Elon Musk, and not of the subject, SpaceX. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

A rare barnstar...[edit]

USCG Barnstar.png The Coast Guard Star
I hereby award you the Coast Guard Star for your continued skillful and conscientious edits of the Wikipedia article United States Coast Guard. The several changes you have made to the article have always resulted in positive improvements in the clarity and accuracy of the article. For your efforts, I award you the Coast Guard Star, and encourage you to continue to help with further improvements to the article. Thank you and Semper Paratus! Cuprum17 Cuprum17 (talk) 00:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


Websites in iPad 7th gen references[edit]

Hi, thanks for cleaning up the references in iPad (7th generation). But you wound up removing a bunch of the website= and a publisher= where there was actual information listed. Can you put those back in? Thanks. Infoman99 (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

April 2017[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at IPad (7th generation) 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 are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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. -KAP03(Talk • Contributions • Email) 22:50, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Changing the date of the rent amount[edit]

You deleted my text of the date change from 1943 to 1974. and you deleted my reference as well. I do not believe that you are correct. The only document from 1934 is the new 1934 Treaty of relations, which does not alter the rental amount. There are very few available documents on the changes to the rental amount, and the book I cited is one. I can send you a picture of the page cited if you are not able to locate the quite definitive volume in your city. ( Martin | talkcontribs 19:23, 12 April 2017 (UTC))

It is 1934, not 1943 that last changed the GTMO rent amount. The amount doesn't matter in reality because the checks just get burned but accuracy is important. I deleted your 1974 date because it conflicts with a reliable modern reference, in this case a book. --Frmorrison (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

What is the book? [I have a different book that has the original documents reproduced in it.] ( Martin | talkcontribs 20:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC))

If you look at the document you cite, it does not say that the rent was changed in 1934. Whereas the reference I cited does say that the rent was changed in 1973 amd 1974 and contains the instructions from the government that causes that to happen. You reference is nice in any case, although not especially great - in that any agreement can be modified by mutual consent, so that is hardly a special condition worthy of note. ( Martin | talkcontribs 19:54, 12 April 2017 (UTC))

What is your interest in Guantanamo Bay, by the way, f you don't mind my asking. I feel it is illegal for many reasons. You? ( Martin | talkcontribs 19:59, 12 April 2017 (UTC))

I printed off the PDF you cite, and it suggests for additional reading the Michael J Strauss book, "the Leasing...." which is the one I cite for 1973 ans 1974. So... ( Martin | talkcontribs 20:03, 12 April 2017 (UTC))

Here is the 2010s book. It includes information about the rent change in 1934. If Leasing's book in 1973 has different information perhaps you should upload it since I don't have easy access to that book. --Frmorrison (talk) 20:10, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Helping with additional content on Blue Apron page[edit]

Hi there, I saw that you helped with a couple of edits to the Blue Apron company page, and would love to know if you are interested or have time in helping me make some additional edits - basic company information, history, recent news, etc. I work for the company and am hoping to work with an independent user to upload some content. I have posted the additions that I'd like to make here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Blue_Apron I tried to very closely adhere to all guidance in terms of linking to verified third party sources for each piece of information, but would of course appreciate any feedback from an experienced Wikipedia user, as I'm new to this.

Let me know if you have time to assist me with this! Many thanks.

Louise.ward (talk) 22:07, 22 May 2017 (UTC)Louise

It is good you initially identified yourself as PR within Blue Apron. I will add some of what you have proposed.--Frmorrison (talk) 13:17, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Copy-paste moves[edit]

Hi there! Just wanted to remind you about WP:CWW. When you copy-paste materials within Wikipedia, you still need to give attribution. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:50, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

New Zealand TW-17.svg Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
You are a great editor and deserve more responsibility. --Frmorrison (talk) 13:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I have nominated Maker (Reed Richards) for merging[edit]

Please discuss here. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:33, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Ralph Torres.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ralph Torres.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t c) 19:46, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Frmorrison. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex ShihTalk 16:08, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

September 2017[edit]

Please could you keep an eye on isoHunt? The same thing has been happening over there. It is a similar situation to KAT, because the original site is offline. It's probably a sockpuppet and definitely a WP:SPA doing this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 04:56, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

I haved added isoHunt to my watchlist. I believe it is the same editor as the one vandalizing KAT. I requested protection for isoHunt and my request for KAT was granted so that editors cannot edit that page for a few weeks. --Frmorrison (talk) 13:18, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I am tempted to file a WP:SPI on all of these red user name accounts that have turned up in the last few days with the purpose of making exactly the same edits.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Please could you keep an eye on Torrent Project as well? It also has attracted the interest of a new account with nothing else to do but alter the URL. I should have filed a WP:SPI by now because whoever is doing it probably is a sock and has a conflict of interest, possibly with clickbait.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:08, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
This was reported at ANI and led to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marylucygril. Whoever did this has been spamming foreign language Wikis as well.[2]]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Frmorrison, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

  • On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
  • Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Hi Frmorrison, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! Cheers, ansh666 19:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Las Vegas shooting[edit]

I put a sourced statement into the LV article. The source in question is from NY mag. Please explain how it was "poorly written", because I see no issue with it. Gdeblois19 18:05, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

The article says the police returned fire but does not say when this happened, so it is not worth reporting. Did the police fire through the door? Did they fire after the door was blown open? It is poorly written since an hour occurred from police getting near the door and blowing it open, so gives no time frame of that event. NY Mag is a good source but that paragraph is poorly written. --Frmorrison (talk) 18:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
  • No, this makes no sense. This makes even less sense--I mean, duh. Drmies (talk) 18:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Just like the NY Mag, the 10 minute statement was poorly written with respect to the timing of events. I am not a great writer, but I know when something is not written properly. I made a tweak to improve it, but it still does not seem right. However, I am not messing with that statement any longer. --Frmorrison (talk) 18:42, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Frmorrison, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)