User talk:MelbourneStar/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

→

Archive 25

CSI (franchise)

Sorry for not explaining myself on my CSI (franchise) edits. Because the franchise is a broader topic than the individual shows, I don't think it makes sense for the article to be included in the individual shows' categories as well. Trivialist (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

That's fair enough, thank you for your explanation. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 07:24, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

Pdfpdf (talk) 11:36, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Pdfpdf! also to you! —MelbourneStar☆^talk 08:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

About Islam in the United States

Hello,

My reply is:

But, the page of Akon itself says since long time ago until now that Akon is a Muslim and provided a reliable source. 212.215.237.101 (talk) 06:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Please next time provide an edit summary noting the reliable source that's attached to said article. Kindly, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 10:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear MelbourneStar,
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! A new year has come! How times flies! 2015 will be a new year, and it is also a chance for you to start afresh! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:52, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook). To use this template, leave {{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}} on someone else's talk page.

Happy New Year MelbourneStar!

Happy New Year!

MelbourneStar,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.
Sent using mass message sender. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from User:Northamerica1000/Mailing list.

Happy New Year MelbourneStar!

Happy New Year!

MelbourneStar,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 12:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

re Minecraftfan14

Minecraftfan14 (talk · contribs) didn't pay attention to your advice about un-constructive editing, they've been adding (and re-adding) unsourced, erroneous tripe and POV comments to Charlie Hebdo shooting and related pages. See this for example adding "This is the second attempt of a terrorist attack in France, and is still continuing now, with more than one hundred more to be killed." . And later this. I've warned them, about sourcing and POV, and left a personal note too. (Happy New Year!?) --220 of ^Borg 02:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Borg!

Should they continue their disruptive editing, I believe making a report at WP:AIV will be more than appropriate. As it stands, they don't really appear to be here to constructively build the encyclopedia. Anyway, Happy New Year to you too! all the best, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 04:10, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Brenton Thwaites

Great work on the Thwaites article. I posted a couple questions about dates in the talk section. Might be right up your alley. DonPMitchell (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Don!

I've responded to your discussion on the talk page. Best, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 14:25, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Rick Perry

I agree with the anons; the "succession box" shouldn't be there. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:47, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

There should be a hidden explanation there for other users who are not familiar with those boxes. The first anon removed content, without the decency of an edit summary. I wasn't going to play the guessing game and assume the removal was appropriate, now was I? —MelbourneStar☆^talk 01:39, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Potentially, it might have been appropriate when Perry was governor (although I doubt it). Once he left office (January 20, I believe), it's no longer potentially appropriate. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Well I wasn't going to sit and think about it; content was removed with no reason or explanation. Had anon 1 used an edit summary to explain what they were doing, with an appropriate reason – this situation would have been avoided. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 06:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Presenting only one side

I found it inappropriate that comments by known staunch advocates against "war on terror" are included on his death, without even a single comment from neutral or pro authors. You have to give space to both views right.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.204.79.170 (talk) 12:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Please do not remove content verified by reliable sources in future without an edit summary. Furthermore, why don't you add an opinion on the contrary side to the author's opinion you had removed?

Nevertheless, the best venue to discuss the article's neutrality is here. Best, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 12:26, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes I did mistake of not leaving "edit comment". But still strongly stand by my view that comments by strong critics Glenn Greenwald and Paul Craig Roberts must be included if and only if we include comments by neutral or other side authors. If the person who included these cares for proper unbiased presentation of information which he/she clearly doesn't, he would have included comments from all parties on his death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.204.79.170 (talk) 12:50, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I tried finding out old articles to balance the views, it's difficult after more than 3 years. Probably I will give it another shot later. Anyway I totally totally admire your work for wikipedia . Please keep on doing the good work. Best wishes and regards - shyam (~Shrivas06) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.204.79.170 (talk) 13:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi MelbourneStar, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! – Gilliam (talk) 09:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC) – Gilliam (talk) 09:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!

Bit of a surprise that is. Best regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 09:44, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aurora Melbourne Central, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Melbourne Central. 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) 09:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for the look out on my talk page. Step out to have a smoke and all holy heck breaks loose! John from Idegon (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Tends to happen at the most inconvenient times —MelbourneStar☆^talk 08:51, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of tallest buildings in Melbourne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Melbourne Central. 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) 08:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm

Not sure what went on here, but I must have hit something in error. Cheers, and thanks for cleaning up after me. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 13:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Apologies if I was a tad sharp in my reversal of your edit.. no edit summary reverts are a pet peeve of mine hahaha but mistakes happen! All the best, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 13:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

Template:Law & Order: Special Victims Unit

{{Law & Order: Special Victims Unit}} should not have a link to Special Victims Unit, as this is not directly related to the television show. This is like having a link to "Doctor" in a navbox for a TV show called Doctors. Per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, if it's in the navbox, the navbox should be on the article, and I'm sure you see it would not be appropriate to have the template {{Law & Order: Special Victims Unit}} on the Special Victims Unit article. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. It is directly related to the series.

Special Victims Unit refers to a division within the NYPD, the subject of the series – where as a doctor, is an occupation.

Also, I believe the mentioning meets at least points 3 to 5 at WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, which in turn stipulates that some of those points can be met, instead of all. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 12:04, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

The show may be directly related to the unit, but not the other way around. And WP:BIDIRECTIONAL doesn't have any points! It reads: Every article that transcludes a given navbox should normally also be included as a link in the navbox so that the navigation is bidirectional. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

The unit is related to the series, however. I wouldn't go as far to adding a navbox to the unit page – but "should normally also be included" does not equate "definately must be included". I believe mentioning said unit is of benefit to our readers as the series is not only about the unit, but rather based and set in the unit.

WP:SIDEBAR is what I meant, apologies for the confusion.

If you're still adamant on its exclusion, then feel free to remove it. It really isn't something to lose sleep over. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 14:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm not going to lose any sleep about it either, was just tidying up some unwieldy navboxes I came across ;) --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

If you honestly still are in doubt of its place within the navbox, I can undo my edit, it's all goods? —MelbourneStar☆^talk 08:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

:) Up to you. For a better parallel than my early example, it's like having Mobile army surgical hospital (US) in {{MASH}}, or Home Guard (United Kingdom) in {{Dad's Army}}. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I shall undo my edit, and should someone else disagree, we'll go from there henceforth. I understand your reasoning, and hence I'll follow that instead. Best regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 11:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton

You are invited to join WikiProject Hillary Clinton, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to American politician Hillary Clinton. You received this invitation because of your history editing articles related to her. The WikiProject Hillary Clinton group discussion is here. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants.

Thanks for your consideration, and please note that joining this project is in no way an endorsement of HRC or her political positions. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:57, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Law & Order: SVU characters

Thanks for the correction. I totally did not notice that. My mistake! - Jabrona (talk) 09:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

All goods! it is a tad confusing, I must admit. But I suppose to assist readers, we've got the "notes" section of the table which documents the character's other roles within the series. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 09:06, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chicago (franchise), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charlie Barnett. 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) 09:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Ref: ICICI Bank wikipedia content change

Dear Melbourne Star,

Thank you for your message. If you notice, I have updated the data, based on references, in para 1 and 2 (links provided in each case). Request you to allow modification on those. The deletion on para 3 was accidental.

waiting to hear from you. thank you.110.173.181.254 (talk) 14:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

You may, by all means, make those said changes – it was just the removal of content which I was concerned about, but seeing as it was an accidental removal of content, then there are no issues.

Kind regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 14:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your hard work catching and reporting vandals at WP:AIV Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 15:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

After a long absence from anti-vandalism editing it's good to see I'm still capable! @Chrislk02: – Thank you very much for this! —MelbourneStar☆^talk 15:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I believe you made a mistake in reverting an edit made to "List of Magic: The Gathering sets"

Hey there,

Just today, Mark Rosewater revealed the codenames of two new Magic: The Gathering sets, "Soup" and "Salad". With this announcement, he also stated that the codename for the set "Monkeys" had been changed to "Laughs".

This can be found in the following link: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/119632317253/new-codenames

As it had not already been done, I edited the article "List of Magic: The Gathering sets" to reflect this change. I made sure to include the reference, and my reason for editing the article. I believe you have made a mistake in reverting this edit, as it is factual and more recent than the current information provided by the article.

Please consider restoring this edit.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.64.200 (talk • contribs)

Hi,

Apart from Tumblr not really being a verifiable reliable source, your edit changed "A storm cloud" to "A storm butt" – which doesn't appear constructive, and therefore has been reverted. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 04:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Hii

Kindly check IICT website. Aadharcard (talk) 06:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please cite said website when you change said content. Thank you, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 06:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Eiditing of Shahid Afridi's page

First of all Afridi is not a former cricketer. He played a T20 International yesterday for Pakistan. He is the captain for Christ sake. So don't mislead readers. Secondly, he is not one of the greatest cricketers of all time. He is not even a Pakistani great. He is a great entertainer but has an average record. Hence, cannot be called a great in cricketing terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creakylol (talk • contribs) 09:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

First of all, your edit removed content that was verified by sources. Secondly, you did so without any explanation, and thirdly, your opinion about what the subject is or isn't notable for – is completely irrelivent. Kind regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 09:46, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union

I removed all the propaganda in there and I was in the middle to put the actual truth in there. I was just getting more information. And yes I am worried that you decided to put it back the way it was because most of it is lies. The EU does not create trade that is point number 1. There is no mention of how much the EU cost the UK. There is no mention of benefits of withdrawing. Are you trying to allow scare mongering into thinking that if the UK left the EU that it would be a natural disaster?

Have you ever heard the saying throwing good money after bad? That is the EU.

Here is a truth, The UK sends the EU £20 Billion a year although the EU sends back up to £10 Billion every year. The EU tell the UK how to spend and where to spend it, then tell the UK that you must stick up a EU flag and say thank you this was built with EU money. No this was built with UK taxpayer money!

Next lie, The EU brings £30 Billion to £90 Billion of trade every year. Politicians never make trade, trade is made on supply and demand. If everyone in the UK stopped buying German Cars like BMW, Audi and Mercedes would the EU still send them over? No, because it is the car manufacturers that send them over and they would say well we are not making any money in the UK. And if the EU created that amount of trade why does the UK have a £1.6 Trillion deficit?

Also, I personally think you can't put quotes in newspapers. The press have a way of asking loaded questions.

If you are going to put this page up then instead of painting the EU like it is the best thing on earth. Look at the Pro's to leaving and the Con's but never should one outweigh the other.

And you should be willing to take points of views from everyone.

I was going to add, the survey companies only do between 1000 and 10000 people. There is no note to that effect on their either.

I do want a reply and I will give you up to 3 days to reply.

Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.136.225 (talk) 16:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

This discussion belongs in here – and for those editors whom edit said article, they can participate in the discussion should they feel the need to. With that said, my issue was with your edits – which rightly or wrongly removed content that was verified by reliable sources. If you dispute this, then you may take it up on the relevant talk page, but please don't remove content because you disagree with it.

Thank you, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 07:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

apologizing

hi, i'm sorry for what i did. i was just figuring out how to upload an image of her on the page but i still can't figure it out and some issues happened so i may have accidentally deleted some texts. would you mind to help me uploading a picture instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monkeypupu22 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Monkeypupu22, and welcome to Wikipedia!

No need to apologise, mistakes happen.

This, I highly recommend you read – it not only explains how to upload images, but what images are appropriate for Wikipedia (licenses etc). If you're still having some difficulties, feel free to let me know, and I'll see what I can do. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 07:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

"Chennai rainbow film festival " page

hey i just made this page quoting source from http://chennaidost.com/chennai-rainbow-film-festival/ its showing warning that my page will be deletd...kindly suggest what to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sourabhkumar01 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the content you added to the page is copyrighted. You haven't simply "quoted" content, but rather copy and pasted copyrighted content. In order to save said article, you'll need to re-write it in your own words (to avoid copyright infringement) and further - verify said content with reliable sources. Thank you, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 09:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Reliability of Content?

I would like to express my concern regarding the content that I posted which you unfortunately removed due to lack of 'resources'. I, myself am a direct descendant of Malak Ahmed Khan and I am willing to confirm this using DNA technology if my information is not 'viable' enough for your satisfaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yousafzai Clan (talk • contribs) 13:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

You are not what Wikipedia defines as a "reliable source". Any information you provide which is based on your own knowledge (and not verified by published reliable sources - ie. books, newspapers etc.) is original research – and will consequently be removed. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 13:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

This is very unfair to hide the truth from the public. People will never find his true origin where he spent his last years of his life due to your careless actions. This is unfair and cruel to the whole clan of Yousafzai and is a complete injustice to them. So please actually read this and not skim through this message. I repeat there was NO TECHNOLOGY back then so please remember this. Then how in the world am I supposed to post resources and if you reply with the exact same message, but in different words I will keep on replying so keep this in mind. I am going to fight for the TRUTH and if you have a problem with this I'm not stopping you, but I will keep on fighting for what is right. I am actually willing to send DNA of my DIRECT relation to Malik Ahmad Khan if you are so paranoid about this, so please keep this in mind.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Yousafzai Clan (talk • contribs)

I'm sorry you feel that way, but unless you have said reliable sources – you will not be able to add the content you wish to add, to the article. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 13:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)