User talk:M0rphzone

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


Because the page is locked, I can't list this at RFD. I have notified User:Fuhghettaboutit, who originally locked the page. I have done as you asked, and expanded Fakelore#Slender Man with reliable sources. Now please, can we end this ludicrous situation in which the same query redirects to two different articles? Serendipodous 14:11, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Great job expanding the section. I think it's best if we also keep a short entry on the list of Internet phenomena, so I've linked the entry to the section on the fakelore article. It'll be better if the topic gets its own article, and I think there's enough reliable information on the topic to have an article on it, but we might still have to wait and see if it's notable enough. Also, it seems that "Slender Man" is the common name for the topic per Google hits, rather than "Slenderman", so I'd update all incoming links and references to use "Slender Man" rather than "Slenderman" for consistency. - M0rphzone (talk) 08:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Also, there's a problem with including Slender Man in the fakelore article. Do any of the sources actually state that Slender Man is an example of fakelore? If they don't, then including Slender Man in that article is original research and synthesis. I'd rather just create a whole new article. - M0rphzone (talk) 09:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
I agree. But fakelore fits the Slender Man far better than "Bogeyman", which is where it was linked originally (without discussion). The Fakelore editors are getting justifiably territorial. We need to get that lock removed so that Slenderman gets his own article. Serendipodous 12:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited PLA Unit 61398, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RSA (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) 11:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

2013 Russian meteor event requested move[edit]


You may have participated in a prior informal discussion on changing the title of 2013 Russian meteor event.

This discussion has been closed in favor of a formal Requested Move.

You are invited to comment on the formal discussion here.

Thank you. μηδείς (talk) 19:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

PS4: present vs future tense[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, M0rphzone. You have new messages at Talk:PlayStation 4.
Message added 10:26, 5 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Article Feedback deployment[edit]

Hey M0rphzone; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, M0rphzone. You have new messages at Talk:April Fool (disambiguation).
Message added 16:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Widefox; talk 16:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

It appears to me[edit]

that you do not understand the meaning of the word legend. This could be the origin of our miscommunication. Please read the article on the subject, particularly the line perceived both by teller and listeners to take place within human history, before discussing this further. Serendipodous 04:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Why did you bring it here? I'd prefer to discuss it on the article talk page, not mine. Next time please post a notice for new messages, instead of fragmenting the discussion. Also, I'd advise against attempting to judge others and trying to mind read their actions or thoughts, or otherwise attempting to assume bad faith. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
I assumed bad faith because you acted in bad faith. You accused me of OR and then inserted OR of your own without discussion. So yeah, I was peeved. Serendipodous 17:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

British Empire[edit]

Re: your edit comment "previous wording was more accurate/specific; new wording is vague and inspecific; removal of book source not discussed".

  1. "previous wording was more accurate/specific; new wording is vague and inspecific". Athough that claim in itself is vague and unspecific, and not accepting that the reword was any less specific than your reword, I'd like to remind you that this is an overview article of 400 years of history across 5 continents and as such is bound to be unspecific by its very nature, otherwise this article would be a multi-volume book. If readers want to get specific they can click on the links to other articles.
  2. "removal of book source not discussed" first. If you read my edit, you will see I replaced the added reference to a reference to Marshall's volume of the Oxford History of the British Empire, Volume II, one of the existing references.

Furthermore, you readded mention of East/West Florida/Senegal despite discussion on the talk page about that. The editor who added that information yesterday wrote "Agreed" following my post that picking these two territories out of the tens of territories mentioned at the peace treaties was both arbitrary and unnecessarily specific given that the main issue at this point was the loss of the 13 colonies. The fact that Britain lost Florida after having control of it for just 20 years, and lost Tobago to France when it would take it back 20 years later are mere side-notes to the story of the 1st/2nd British Empires that are being discussed in this section. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 11:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, fair enough, but I didn't read that talk page section since it wasn't about the American colonies section. - M0rphzone (talk) 18:56, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Re-listed thread[edit]

Hello M0rphzone. I re-listed a thread where you had commented and I did hope to hear your opinion on the internal comment overall. Thanks. My76Strat (talk) 04:26, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

MOS:BOLDTITLE and Boston Marathon bombings[edit]

As you were involved in a discussion at Talk:Boston Marathon bombings#MOS:BOLDTITLE regarding the intro of that article, you may be interested in the discussion at WT:LEAD#MOS:BOLDTITLE and its application to specific situations, since it further concerns that situation. Thanks. – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 14:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


In response to your Edit Summary i just wish to say that the article was using an unacceptable mixture of MDY and DMY, before i changed it to just MDY since it is a topic dealing with America which as i understand is the primary date format for Florida and the US and allowable by the MoS.Jason Rees (talk) 22:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Project Loon[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

HTC One image[edit]

He cropped it out of this other image that was perfectly fine. Also, infobox image should reflect the most common model; the silver one is just that. ViperSnake151  Talk  02:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of HTC devices, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DDR2 (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) 15:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Your new leads...[edit]

I just have a few problems with them;

  1. Why did you remove "Taiwanese"? The country of origin should be acknowledged.
  2. You completely removed references to Android in the lead. The lead must summarize the entire article; the fact that it is an Android device is a key point.
  3. Would "produced" be a better word? It can in a way infer that the company was involved in every aspect of its creation, and not just development.

ViperSnake151  Talk  17:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

  1. No, it shouldn't. The COO is extraneous information. If people wanted to know more about HTC, they could click the link and be immediately informed that HTC is based in Taiwan. We don't go around saying "the Korean/multinational company Samsung Electronics" or "the American company Motorola Mobility" or "the Finnish/multinational company Nokia" in every single article on their products do we? Also, repeatedly pre-pending the COO unnecessarily attributes irrelevant political/national connotations to an otherwise apolitical topic. I may be thinking too much into it, but adding the COO to every single product article (especially in consumer electronics where numerous models are released each year) is completely unnecessary.
  2. Hmm, well the SGS4 article also didn't note that key point, but it's been re-added.
  3. "Produced" actually implies low involvement and seems generally used for movies and forms of entertainment/art, while "developed and manufactured" implies more involvement and is more specific to IT and consumer electronics.
Btw, great job on the rewrite; the article flows a lot better now. - M0rphzone (talk) 00:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update[edit]

Hey M0rphzone. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:33, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Peer review[edit]

Yeah, re-open it. Personally, those shouldn't be closed if no one does it. ViperSnake151  Talk  06:03, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Note on edit[edit]

Please note that this edit [1] while otherwise good should not have changed the date format to dmy, partially because most of the reference dates were in ISO, while secondly Valve being an American company, means the article has strong national ties and thus should be using mdy in prose. --MASEM (t) 19:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

That wasn't a very good reason to revert my edit, Masem. It doesn't matter if Valve is an American company or not. That argument only applies when there are strong national ties to the subject. The article on Steam Machines is hardly a strong national topic, not to mention that Valve is a global corporation that is not subject to national boundaries or conventions. The dates were unstandardized and the dmy format is recommended by the MLA and other organizations. And if you didn't object to anything else besides the date format, then please don't do another nonconstructive and disruptive revert like that again. - M0rphzone (talk) 20:27, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Wrong. Even ignoring the strong national ties (which, btw, we use all the time in video games based on the developer (like GTAV being all UK based since Rockstar is UK-based), the dates were either mdy or ISO, and your change to dmy breaks WP:DATERET. Also the fact you reformatted the article to try to match some claimed "standard" wasn't helping either. The box is not the same as a game console, so while we should follow the general approach, there's too many differences that that standard style can't work with here. And on your re-reversion, you deleted sourced information that I added about games, so that's not helpful. --MASEM (t) 20:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I've re-added the sourced section on games. What happened to you man? You weren't like this when we edited the Internet phenomena article. It's not very helpful if you and I keep reverting and you'll break 3RR at this rate. What about my edit do you not like? I rewrote the sentences to make them flow better; can you read over the differences and compare my revision with your previous revision? Also, you might be mistaken - the Steam Machines are game consoles (not PCs). - M0rphzone (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
You're violating DATERET by forcing dmy dates, when there are national ties and when I started the article with mdy/ISO dates. You are not supposed to change those, and yet you just reverted those back. --MASEM (t) 20:49, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
After changing back the dates to mdy, the extra headings just don't necessarily work at this time given what information we have. It may be a "console" but its a PC (since anyone can technically build their own from the appropriate certified components), and running an open OS that allows tinkering, and as such, all the topics that would normally apply to consoles don't apply here. They may be appropriate later when a lot more information is available but at this time they are just taking up space that we know cannot presently be filled. That's the problem with trying to standardize the format without considering all the factors and better to do that after enough article development has been done to know bet to use it. --MASEM (t) 21:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Alright fair enough, but note that dmy format is pretty much only used in the US. Everyone else uses DMY or YYYY-MM-DD. Not to mention that DMY is favored by MLA, APA, CMS and many others. There's no reason not to start using dmy even if mdy is the "de facto" format. Also, if your only objections are the date and section formats, then you should only be reverting those two things. You have no reason to be be reverting my entire revision just to fix specific parts in the article. - M0rphzone (talk) 21:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Snow in Florida[edit]

Hi Morphzone,

Thank you for offering to help get Snow in Florida ready for a main page slot. Its entry has been active since May. Do you see any remaining issues with the article? Neelix (talk) 19:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Everything looks good. The references just need to be updated with archive urls and dates, then it should be ready for the front page. - M0rphzone (talk) 22:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Morphzone! I have repaired all of the link rot except for this broken link: [2] The Wayback Machine doesn't have that page archived and the National Climatic Data Center website is currently inaccessible because of the government shutdown. Any idea what we can replace this link with? Neelix (talk) 23:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
It seems like there aren't any good snapshots from before 2011. All the snapshots I found via are 404 pages. We can leave that one for now, but all the other refs should probably be archived. What I do is search for the term "archived" on the article page and then ctrl G through the matching entries until I see a ref that isn't archived. This might help keep track of the ones that are archived or not. - M0rphzone (talk) 23:44, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

A new mission...[edit]

More important than the HTC One is the article on the first Android phone ever? (yeah, I need some help with some minor copyedits for GA) ViperSnake151  Talk  15:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree, an article on the first Android phone should definitely be a GA, if not an FA. There's a lot of sources we can use, so the article could probably be improved to twice its current length/depth, if not more. Also, there were many variants made for the Dream so we could have a large section on that, not to mention the section on the reception and general implications of the first Android phone launch. There are a lot of images we can use from the Commons too. - M0rphzone (talk) 00:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

A discussion you may be interested in[edit]

Hello. I have started a thread over at the Nexus One talk page about restructuring the article, and perhaps going bigger with the idea. Zach Vega (talk to me) 12:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phonebloks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BGR (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) 20:21, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link fixing one-day contest[edit]

I have decided to put on a mini-contest within the November 2013 monthly disambiguation contest, on Saturday, November 23 (UTC). I will personally give a $20 gift card to the disambiguator who fixes the most links on that server-day (see the project page for details on scoring points). Since we are not geared up to do an automated count for that day, at 00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) (which is 7:00 PM on November 22, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the project page leaderboard. I will presume that anyone who is not already listed on the leaderboard has precisely nine edits. At 01:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC) (8:00 PM on November 23, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the leaderboard at that time (the extra hour is to give the board time to update), and I will determine from that who our winner is. I will credit links fixed by turning a WP:DABCONCEPT page into an article, but you'll have to let me know me that you did so. Here's to a fun contest. Note that according to the Daily Disambig, we currently have under 256,000 disambiguation links to be fixed. If everyone in the disambiguation link fixers category were to fix 500 links, we would have them all done - so aim high! Cheers! bd2412 T 02:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

"Fluff adjectives"[edit]

It is not a adjective, it is a title. Where is the appropriate Manual of Style entry on this? Are we giving undue weight to HTC? ViperSnake151  Talk  02:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

No, it's not exactly a title, but more of a marketing adjective term. There's no specific MOS style afaik, but WP:AVOID says to avoid using "puffery" or weasel phrasing. I don't think the adjectives really serve any use other than as marketing fluff terms, so there's no need to use them. What other articles do are irrelevant, and in fact, they should likely be cleaned up as well for usage of this kind of adjective. One reason I removed it is because the blue color variant is inconsistently described in the product pages and news articles. Some use "Metallic Blue, others say "Vivid Blue", while most actually don't use the extra marketing adjectives and only use the base color as a descriptor. It really is unnecessary to use the terms; best practice is to remove them/avoid using them altogether. - M0rphzone (talk) 03:04, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to QR code 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:
  • early version] of this Wikipedia article)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Google Glass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Town & Country (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) 08:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Panama Disease and Tone[edit]

Hey, quick question: You marked some things for tone in Panama disease. It looks like those things have been changed. Could you let us know at the talk page if it's safe to remove the tone tag? superlusertc 2014 January 01, 17:13 (UTC)

Possible vandalism[edit]

Hello. I'm not an active member here so I don't know so well about the project, but today when I read Atmosphere (unit), I found out that this IP address added wrong information in order to vandalize the article (Atmosphere (unit): Difference between revisions). Since he also edited many articles, I'm afraid that a person who didn't have good faith like him would be likely to add more wrong information to other articles. (When I checked his talk page, I saw that you had left him a message, that's why I'm here. You can always reply here as I have bookmarked your Talk page. Thank you.) Gaconnhanhnhen (talk) 07:41, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. The user also seems to have stopped editing after June 28, 2012, and the majority of the user's edits appear to have been made in good faith, so it's probably unnecessary to do anything else other than revert the unconstructive ones. - M0rphzone (talk) 02:56, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Flappy Bird Talk page[edit]


Greetings! Hope you are good and doing fine.

I see, recently you did some clean up on Flappy Bird's talk page (I really appreciate that). In that clean up my newly created section was also removed. I thought I might have violated some terms and conditions of using Talk pages because I was new, so I went through the wikipedia's article about using talk pages. After going through the article I came to know that I haven't violated any terms and conditions, and the removal was unnecessary (please correct me if I am wrong.). An explained reason for removal of my section will be really appreciated so that I won't do the same mistake again if I did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivek201 (talkcontribs) 14:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Vivek201, thanks for your message. I removed the section because it was off-topic, but it can stay on the talk page as long as it isn't spam. The content you suggested to add is too trivial for the article, so that's why it wasn't added. Thanks for the suggestion. - M0rphzone (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

318 Taiwan movement[edit]


  • You can vote there to push this event into the news.

Other issue is: you restored within the article content which is a copy of an external webpage, and as such, very likely a copyright violation. Do you have any ground to allow this use ? Yug (talk) 05:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I've attempted a rewrite of that section already. How would you rather present the information instead? Now the article is missing quite a large amount of information. - M0rphzone (talk) 01:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

HTC One (2013) listed at Requested moves[edit]


An editor has requested for HTC One (2013) to be moved to HTC One (M7). Since you had some involvement with HTC One (2013), you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). Steel1943 (talk) 14:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: HTC One (2013) talk subpages[edit]

I don't understand what exactly you want done. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:26, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I put a speedy on that one to have it fixed. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014[edit]

Today's motto...

Laudator temporis acti
("Praiser of time past")

Nominate one today!

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).