User talk:NewEnglandYankee

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


Hello, NewEnglandYankee, 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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Justin Eiler 03:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


Process Articles[edit]

im sorry for vandalizing your page — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:00, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi you removed my edit on list of oldest dogs, as I was trying to remove 19 and 20 which does not fit the list as it asks for dogs over 20 years old. The dogs who are 16 and 15 are definitely not over 20 and are not part of the 20 oldest dogs ever. Please advise. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I recently had a few posts removed and cited as spam. The posts cite real work, but must have been pulled due to wording. Could you provide an example of one re-written to I handle them correctly and unbiased? (talk) 15:59, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for such a quick reply. So in order to avoid the language and citing problem since the work is applicable and relevant, could you re-word just this one as an example? The source is legit, and I could remove the documented and the book piece, but want to be sure that would solve the problem. Also, if it is print, is just referencing it as print and removing the link ok for the citation piece?

Enterprise ecosystems

Many technology and corporate executives also use the term "business ecosystem" to describe the management of an enterprise as an integrated network in which all business processes, and related attributes are interconnected and driving toward business success. The concept of treating an enterprise as an ecosystem was documented in Tristan Boutros and Tim Purdie's 2013 book, The Process Improvement Handbook: A Blueprint for Managing Change and Increasing Organizational Performance by McGraw-Hill [22] . They expand on Moore's original concept and focus it specifically on individual corporations and interpreting them as an ecosystem of interconnected components, or as a community of objects functioning together as a unit. It promotes managing and improving operations in a cross-functional and centralized manner with business process at the heart of this mindset. This approach considers all aspect of a business as one connected system including strategic goals, projects, policies, processes, procedures, systems, business rules, people, departments, measures, resources, infrastructure and so forth. (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Vandal patrol[edit]

Hi, I'm Elara, and I'm vandalism patrol with you today. Varmits are active , ain't they? --ElaragirlTalk|Count 17:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

blanking user talk page[edit]

I reported this problem to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents‎ Somebody has been using a series of IP addresses to systematically blank user talk pages--he hit mine User talk:Rjensen a number of times as well as User talk:Hlj User talk:Kablammo and User talk:Luna Santin and probably others

What the targets all have in common is we strongly protested Stevewk who tried repeatedly to remove all the information about the Civil War from the Abraham Lincoln article. Stevewk was given a 3R suspension but may be using sockpuppets to hit editors. Thus he may be using etc. Rjensen 23:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


... for rvv on my user page. amitch 06:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Pornography[edit]

Your recent edit to Pornography (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 23:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for the rvv on my user page. I'm not even sure what I did to offend this guy; he might be a sock puppet.

Have you considered joining the Recent changes patrol? -- DiegoTehMexican 04:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert on my talk page! --Fang Aili talk 04:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks For The Userpage Revert[edit]

Thanks.  :) -WarthogDemon 21:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Pope Shenouda III of Alexandria[edit]

should we warn the user with {{blank}}? West Brom 4ever 21:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


I guess you're fixing vandalism too...

You always beat me to it...

Dark Ermac 15:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Flying Shark?[edit]

Can you give me a link to this user's contribs?--Kungfu Adam (talk) 16:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


Thank you for helping stop vandals and your rvv on New Richmond, WI


Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for correcting my user page after the three continuous cases of vandalism. After looking over your talk page, it looks like you came to the rescue of more than one user's page, so in appreciation here is a barnstar for your excellent vandal fighting. Keep up the good work! Nehrams2020 07:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for reverting my user page... ahh, the trials and travails of vandal patrol! :-) Hiberniantears 21:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


In your edit summary, you wondered why so many people were vandalising the article. It was mentioned in Napoleon Dynamite, that's my theory. -- Zanimum 18:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[[Shoessss 15:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)]][edit]

Thank you for the quick revert on my talk page.Shoessss 15:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


Project Logo Hello, NewEnglandYankee and thank you for your contributions on articles related to A Series of Unfortunate Events. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject A Series of Unfortunate Events, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of A Series of Unfortunate Events and related articles on Wikipedia.

If you would like to help out and participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! <3Clamster 20:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for your fix to vandalism on the Afrocentrism page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soursop (talkcontribs) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

Hey Yo[edit]

Not shure what ur woried about and warning me of. I do mostly grammer & spelling fixes, usually theyren't even possibly vandalisim. (talk) 03:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


Hello New England Yankee From your interaction with the Autism article in the recent past I infer you wish to see that it complies with Wikipedia’s guidelines as do I.

I am writing to you about an edit to the introduction section of Autism made by Q0 (whom I believe to be a valuable contributor) and I have no wish to get into a edit war with that person). In my opinion, the altered text presents problems (see my rationale in the discussion section on the 'Introduction').

If you have time and you are interested, take a look and give us some objective feedback. Ta. Malangthon 03:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching my mistake[edit]

Thanks so much for catching the final bit of vandalism that I missed on the Tractor article. Vandal fighting is not my specialty, but I want to get a little taste of everything there is to do here. I'll check the page history more thoroughly in the future. Thanks again, -- Satori Son 15:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC) - vandalism IP[edit]

Hi, caught your words on this vandals account. Simply LOVE your user page ! Superb ! Please feel free to comment on my similar opinions (though perhaps less tastefully done as you) at my page! Pedro1999a |  Talk  20:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Further, I loved your user page so much I've pinched a quote to put on my page! Hope you don't mind!Pedro1999a |  Talk  09:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Panama Canal[edit]

Thanks! I went back and sent warnings to all of the remaining "red" talk pages when you'd finally slowed them down. Until next time...

Take care,


Lmcelhiney 18:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Georgia (U.S. state) article[edit]

I just wanted to drop a line to thank you for reverting the vandalism on the Georgia article page. I tried myself to fix the vandalism, but every time there'd be more. Thanks! Reb 20:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Please be more careful[edit]

Please be more careful when reverting. You reverted over three legitimate edits on the Haley, which I have restored.[1]Gunslinger47 18:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My apologies; thanks for catching this. NewEnglandYankee 18:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
It's no problem. Thanks for reverting the vandalism that you did! :) –Gunslinger47 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Baseball fan?[edit]

You name is mysterious when it comes to a certain rivalry involving your area. BuickCenturyDriver 02:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry for the bad edit summary, it was origially was under the header of a removed attack left by an unregistered (and upset) user. I usually leave a new comment by editing the last comment and posting a new one at the bottom.BuickCenturyDriver 02:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Try clicking the plus (+) tab at the top of the page to add a new conversation thread. It produces less confusing edit summaries and doesn't ever result in edit conflicts. –Gunslinger47 07:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I am a baseball fan, as it happens ... a faithful Red Sox fan, from a tender age. The username is a cultural identifier, not a sportive one. I prepended "NewEngland," in fact, so that the Yankee monicker wouldn't be taken as referring to That Other Team. NewEnglandYankee 15:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Hmm...I see. Just imagine if someone chose User:NewYorkSox as the opposite of your name. BuickCenturyDriver 21:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for giving that bit of information (diff)! He also vandalized my talkpage, but I think that with that last level warning, he should calm down. Thank, though!! - Hairchrm 05:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I "vandalized" nothing. Just writing random things on your page just like you did to mine. Where are these accusations based from? Do you even look into it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)


You must edit way too many articles... I recogized your name in the history section of two entirely unrelated articles.  :-)

Selevercin 15:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Helpful hints[edit]

I really like them. Keep it up!

(Mj92 09:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC))

me (the annoying person who continually edits lonelygirl15)[edit]

what's the four warnings routine? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 00:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

Edit summary at Stuff[edit]

Please avoid using abusive edit summaries as per Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks and happy editing. --Steve Farrell 16:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Pesistent vandalism[edit]

Hi, I noticed your previous warnings to User for vandalism whilst checking out his/her "contributions" just now. Today's targets were Llandudno and Talk:Great Orme. Seems to be a school student judging by the comment on the Llandudno page and the generally silly nature of the vandalism. However it IS annoying and persistent; a random check shows nothing but this sort of nonsense vandalism as User:'s contributions to date. I'm an admin on cy:wikipedia (different name) but am "powerless" here. Could you have another look and consider appropriate action, please? Enaidmawr 00:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The revert[edit]

Thanks for it! :) Acalamari 20:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Clown (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. For future editing tests use the sandbox. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 03:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


...for devandalizing my Talk page. - Eron Talk 01:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

... and for devandalizing my page and another 3 pages i've contributed to.Sergiogr 18:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Another Brain Star[edit]

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank-you for reverting massive amounts of vandalism. I noticed this after you fixed Miles "Tails" Prower. I decided to look into your editing history and found out that the last 100 or so contributions were just vandal reverting. Keep up the good work! Sincerely, Sir Intellegence - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 22:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

holy fucking[edit]

shit that was a fast reversion. Are you just sitting there pressing refresh on my contributions page you fag? Jesus liftchasing Christ. — John Stattic (talk) 01:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

You know, I thought about undoing this, but it's really rather flattering when you come to think about it. NewEnglandYankee 01:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Al Pacino[edit]

Thanks for the fast reversion on Al Pacino. Take care, Kudret abiTalk 06:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Article Koreans[edit]

Thanks for reverting that back farther. I don't think Twinkle caught it all, but you got back to it before I could! --Ioeth 17:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


After archiving all the old talk from the Talk:Lightbulb joke page, I went and deleted the talk from the page. The comment made by User:DerHexer was uninformed and kinda rude. Please go and revert the reversion you made here. 16:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


Someone vandalized my Userspace! Face-crying.svg But a little angel came along and fixed it! Face-angel.svg Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Nburden 19:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Nburden 19:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! (looks like I'm not the first)[edit]

Just wanted to thank you for reverting my userpage, so, thanks. Looks like you've helped a lot of people out, keep it up! --Kyle(talk) 00:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar[edit]

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. :-) Lradrama 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my User Page! --ChetblongTalkSign 22:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007[edit]

Information.svg Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Hard coding: You may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Jauerback (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

JANUARY 2008[edit]

Thank you. You appear to have netted another one of the b*ggers !. Thanks for the assist. nice to know you guys are out there.

The Stealth Ranger (talk) 10:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


Hello NewEnglandYankee, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 19:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Thanks! Always nice to be appreciated. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 21:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
    • You're welcome! Acalamari 21:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
      • NewEnglandYankee, you're making helpful use of it from what I can see! -- House of Scandal (talk) 18:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Brooklyn Dodgers[edit]

Hi, NewEnglandYankee!

I've followed your work for a while and admire your outlook on life, hence why i have decided to come to you to pick your brain on something.

a short while back you made a minor contribution to the Brooklyn Dodgers article and so i assume you may have an opinion on the matter.

It concerns the 23 Feb edit of the article. Now, i have to say, i can't argue with what the user says on current wikipedia practice. However, i have for a while now been thinking about the whole franchise situation and that teams like the Minnessota Lakers or the Dodgers, which were very big teams even before their move to their current homes, deserve their own albeit brief articles, simply to highlight their achievements in their original homes - especially due to the fact that a) they were characteristically very different teams, and b) the articles for LA Lakers and LA Dodgers simply don't reflect the brief and concise info that, for example, the Brooklyn Dodgers article did at your last edit a few days ago

This point has been much discussed in the Talk:Los Angeles Dodgers article, i know, but i'd like someone else's opinion before i raise the issue again there and, more importantly, at the Sports Portal.

Thanks, and looking forward to your reply! BigSteve (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


Why'd you revert my edit? That usage is, in fact, completely and utterly wrong. I'm not a vandal!

sometimes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I see. Thank you SO much for helping me see the light. <333 (talk) 02:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Alex Trebek[edit]

sorry, somehow my eyes saw wrong--  Rmzadeh  ►  17:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

user talk:Hersfold[edit]

Accidental rollback click? Regards, Javért  |  Talk 04:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Same question. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, my bad. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 04:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for stopping vandalism on my page[edit]


Thank you for finally trying to put a stop to this pyscho. If you look at the history for the article, I've had to undo him (as well as other people) a ridiculous number of times. I've left msg's on the talk pages of "Goodman" and "Strong" and to still no avail. Thanks again. jlcoving (talk) 01:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

User "" again vandalized the page. "Strong01" also continues to do so. Will you please admonish them? Strong01 went so far as to delete the ENTIRE page earlier. Thankfully "Cluebot" immediately corrected it. jlcoving (talk) 21:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Friendly note regarding talk page messages[edit]

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or shared IP header templates (for unregistered editors). However, it should be noted that these exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 00:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


For the revert on my user page. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 20:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
This is for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Thank you very much. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 21:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC) Vandal you warned is back[edit]


It seems minor but this user has given nothing constructive to the Wiki and has consistently vandalized it. I tracked the ip but I don't know if this is a school/house/etc. I thought you might like to know. Thanks, Colincbn (talk) 01:49, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for that; it was an IRC joke. ceranthor 04:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


for that. --RrburkeekrubrR 03:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 03:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Colin Sabine vandalism[edit]

You're right. The Spanish article doesn't mention the famous Mexican subway planner, and when you check the web you get some teenager with a Facebook account.
Your deduction proves sound, sir.
Cheers, Varlaam (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


I just saw it, and I left my laptop on for about ten minutes or so, and my nephew edited it, not me. Peter Griffen Boy (talk) 20:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for spotting what was clearly an error on my part and reverting it, here. I vaguely remember that, but don't recall the specifics which led up to it. I couldn't have been that badly confused, so I'm guessing that it was some sort of a mis-click. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

We all do it. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 17:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles 05:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Would you be interested in being an advisor about a documentary on the Panama Canal?[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you have more than ten edits on the Panama Canal article. First of all I would like to say thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Secondly, I am writing to ask you if you would consider participating as an advisor to a group producing a documentary about the canal and its history. If this is of interest to you please drop me a note on my talk page. Thank you for your time. Psingleton (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Titanium Dioxide[edit]

The 'nano' section that is increasingly being added to chemistry pages is no really useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


If the semi-protection doesn't work, full protection may be needed. I don't know of anything that happened today to attract all this attention, do you? Acroterion (talk) 04:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

It's a mystery to me. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Typhon does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Dusty777 (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

It's a rollback. It doesn't leave an edit summary. (In this particular case, I was reverting an edit that changed the Greek Heracles into the Roman Hercules. Arguably, this isn't quite an appropriate use of rollback; consider the point noted.) NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I see. Quite a few users make edits without use of the edit summary, and I generally try to inform them to use the edit summary. No problem, sorry for the mistake. =D Dusty777 (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Help Survey[edit]

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user-page[edit]

Thanks for going to the vandal's contributions and reverting the vandalism to my user page! :) Also, do you use any specific tool(s) to revert vandalism? Anir1uph (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • You're welcome. No, I don't use any special tools, just the occasional glance at the Recent Changes list.
  • OK! I would like to suggest Wikipedia:STiki as an excellent tool for vandal fighting (dedicated or occasional). It makes the process very easy, and since i saw you doing quite a lot of work in vandal-fighting and also as a rollbacker. Just a friendly suggestion! Thanks anyways! :D Anir1uph (talk) 23:42, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Cathy Ferguson[edit]

Hello, I work for Cathy Ferguson, 2x Olympic Gold Medalist and CEO for Girl Scouts of Central California South. Her information has been incorrect on her birth date for years. I tried updating it about two years ago to bring her current but then someone deleted everything she had on the site previous to that as well.... her work with Girls Inc., American Red Cross, Disney and so on. How do I get her birth date correct (July 22, 1948) and the other information back as well as her current great work onto Wikipedia? The other option is for me to give you her email address so you can contact her. Let me know your thoughts.

Pattycraven (talk) 20:54, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


Just wanted to say thanks for the revert to my talk page Fraggle81 (talk) 17:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Your second revert to my talk page in a week, thanks again.

Article Feedback deployment[edit]

Hey NewEnglandYankee; 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) 23:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

patton oswalt[edit]

please to justify inclusion of unsource claims before adding in, is degrading to quality of article to include information without source. leave it out. is against rule to have original research in article. will remove now, but if find source for information feel free to add back in. Lakdfhia (talk) 21:25, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

"Original work" in "Autism rights movement" article[edit]

I was unaware that an observation clearly supported by one's own eyes constitutes "original work." What is most troubling is that&#151;as I segue from article to article to article&#151;I encounter ever-increasing levels of incompetence; falsehoods presented as fact; and infuriatingly weak (conceptually) "explanations" of what is readily explainable by a true expert, with the side effect that such "explanation" will be flagged as "original content" by some parochial reviewer.

Why is it that none of this is ever challenged&#151;other than by the attachment of some standard box at the top of the article to state what improvements the article requires&#151;whereas my edits, good, bad, or mediocre, are summarily deleted by John Q. Schmuck?

You know, once upon a time I would devote actual effort to repairing articles that some moron destroyed or failed properly to construct from the outset. I have a knack for reducing pages and pages of nonsense to a paragraph or two of crystal clarity. Of course, this immediately raises the hackles of yet some other critic; they appear to be waiting for some demon to notice my changes and inform them, as if #1 Priority is "stanch any edits by Bruce David Wilner."

And you expect the quality of Wikipedia to INCREASE in this manner? (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Nobody is forcing you to participate in Wikipedia. It's a voluntary community with a well-known set of community standards. Among those standards are those of no original research and verifiability. There are many other places on the internet where you can describe your personal experience and expertise at whatever length suits you.
If you are truly interested in improving Wikipedia, please read the links I provided, which give the policies and the reasons behind them. To summarize briefly and bluntly, however: all you have done in your edits is share your opinion. There are many people with opinions, many of whom disagree with you. If you would like Wikipedia readers to believe your argument, you need to provide some better backup than "because I think so, and I'm ME".

great old bulgaria[edit]

CHAPTER CXX the oldest documents about Bulgaria and Kubrat are from the chronics of JOhn of Nikiu in early 600 AD:

47. And when the inhabitants of Byzantium heard this news, they said: 'This project is concerned with Kubratos, chief of the Huns, the nephew of Organa, who was baptized in the city of Constantinople, and received into the Christian community in his childhood and had grown up in the imperial palace.'

CHAPTER LXXXIX 74. But immediately on his return to the emperor, the latter removed him from his command, and appointed in his room another general, named Cyril, of the province of Illyria. 75. And he also gave battle to Vitalian, and there was great slaughter on both sides. Cyril the general retired into the city named Odyssus, and stayed there while Vitalian withdrew into the province of Bulgaria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:02, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for helping protect our "bad words"[edit]

Thank you. I've semiprotected most of the articles in question for a month, since there's no reasoning with the IP-hopper. Feel free to let me know if you should notice other articles that need it for the same reason. Bishonen | talk 00:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC).

Thanks. Will do. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

NewEnglandYankee, we need to talk, listen why do you keep editing again and again, don't you ever do that again okay? if i catch you your grounded, So Synopsis Attraction Facts are protected,so don't do this again, if you do that i had enough of editing, So, Promise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medjca53 (talkcontribs) 19:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

User page[edit]

I don't like cluttering people's Talk pages with personal comments, so forgive. But I really like your User Page stuff. Nice - says it all really :) Acabashi (talk) 20:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

You're too kind! Thanks. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 22:01, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Information icon Hello, I'm I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to The Borrowers (1997 film) because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You can't remove other peoples warnings either) (talk) 00:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Wendy Davis[edit]

The material I added was a synopsis of an article by Jay Root at Washington Post 11/6/2014. It is not the same material as previous line written 5 days later.

Then you need to provide a citation when you add it, at the very least. It's unlikely that such material will be accepted (without first establishing consensus) in any case, but without a cite you've got no chance at all. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 04:01, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Kevin de León[edit]

I think that you applied the wrong template to the editor who is edit-warring the article. I don't think that the edits were vandalism, but they were biographies of living persons violations. This is a minor point, but I think that you used the wrong template for a needed warning. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:50, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

I think you're right. Thanks for the correction. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 23:52, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

William Paterson University[edit]

Thanks very much for explaining, I'm still learning! Next time I'll use the edit summary section :) JakeMadison1923 (talk) 14:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Are you unnormal? why you deleted my edition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grean landrd (talkcontribs) 03:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank You![edit]

Gun.png Editing True Information
Please stop editing my true information that I got out of BOOKS. I would appreciate it if you stop.

Thank You from Ben Loves History Benl Loves History (talk) 01:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)


Question.png Question
How old are you? Benl Loves History (talk) 01:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for changing the Henry Knox page and I'm sorry for doing it. I'm new to Wikipedia and just did the Henry Knox change to practice editing. I'm sorry and is it okay if we become "friends"? Benl Loves History (talk) 21:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015[edit]

Information icon Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Uncle Sam‎: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. I appreciate the work you do reverting vandalism. Let's help out the admins by building a paper trail every time we revert vandalism. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Cute grey kitten.jpg

For excellent anti-vandal work, and a very humorous userpage.

BakerStMD T|C 21:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

ANI Question[edit]

Hi. I was just curious as to why you reverted my minor edit at ANI? --IJBall (talk) 02:31, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Pure fat-fingering on my part. I apologize! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
No prob! It's not like I haven't done stuff like that too!! --IJBall (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


Hello, im trying to post an official BIO from MR Eduardo Eurnekian. Some information in his Wikipedia page is incorrect.

I work with him. (talk) 15:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)TOM

Mary Lindell[edit]

Hi NewEnglandYankee, could you please have a look at my edits in Mary Lindell. Kattiel (talk) 09:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

An anonymous user repeatedly deletes the controversy paragraph. Kattiel (talk) 12:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I have just posted a warning at his talk page. Kattiel (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for reporting that vandal to Wikipedia administration. He just kept ignoring our warnings! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joel.Miles925 (talkcontribs) 20:23, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


Hey! Thanks for your two template messages - please don't template me! It's horrificly cold and impersonal, and I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate it. I'm just trying to learn the ropes. Please see: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. I was looking at these and thinking why hadn't the page been protected for persistent vandalism - I must have edited an old revision of the page by accident, thus saving the vandalism - totally unintentional. I was wondering if you understood? (talk) 21:38, 16 January 2016 (UTC)


Inertia is a property of matter I'm not lying wtf man Sippicups (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I never said you were lying. I said you were degrading the article, apparently deliberately. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 05:10, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Understood, regarding 4chan. I am sorry about that edit. Tejas Ramakrishnan (talk) 05:21, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Control Rod - Look first at references and hidden comments added from the author long time before of the content with originator rights outside on new material or processes etc.[edit]

Unbelievable or not read because I am the author of more entries than said now long time before see history just changed in text style. kayuweboehm(at) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:21, 29 February 2016 (UTC) If you are deleting my copyright for materials and processes etc. but leaving the content and not inserting again you are out of real law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Fred Savage[edit]

Whoops, accidentally clicked the wrong version on Twinkle. Thanks for correcting me. FA9295 (talk) 01:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

No apology necessary; it happens to everyone. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 01:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

You accidentally undid my edit[edit]

I didn't notice the Nandulism (bad pun - Nandu + vandalism) on the Celery article. I just went to check if celery was related to anything. I went down to "Cultural Depictions" and noticed a lack of Doctor Who. (The Fifth Doctor wears a celery on his lapel.) So when you reverted the Nandulism, my edit went with it. Here's the edit and the reversion for comparison: [[17]] (talk) 01:12, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid it was not accidental. I don't think the reference is significant or encyclopedic in nature. However, you're right in that I shouldn't have rolled your edit back; I should have left a valid edit summary. You may want to discuss on the article's talk page. I'll recuse myself from further action. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 01:28, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


Hey there, I protected your user page and talk page for a couple of days. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:52, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:53, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Maine Maritime Academy[edit]

Hey buddy, what's going on with your addition to the Maine Maritime page? Why do you care? Rocketj4 (talk) 21:36, 22 April 2016 (UTC

I care because, when an editor whose name suggests a conflict of interest repeatedly removes cited negative information from a page, while refusing to discuss the removal at the Talk page, it looks pretty suspicious to me. For the record, I wasn't the person who originally added that information, and I have no personal knowledge of or stake in these events. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Well, that makes good sense. The whole "conversation" just looked odd, since the actual article itself is so thin. Why introduce an issue on a plate so empty? But I guess only the person who added the section knows why. Thanks for paying attention to such stuff.Rocketj4 (talk) 22:24, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Citing/ References[edit]

So I didnt mean to replace any cited or referenced info, just add some more. I looked at the help page to understand how to cite information but saw tips that involved using the html format. Is there an easy way to do it with out the code? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckieanne (talkcontribs) 17:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten in a helmet.jpg

For putting up with talk page vandals.

ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 19:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

AN/I Notice[edit]

I made a page at AN/I for the vandalism on your user page. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 19:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016[edit]

Information icon Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. It's not the first time you've been warned. This is very annoying. Anyhow, thanks for fighting vandalism. Peter Sam Fan 14:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

When it's a new user who pops up with a single drive-by vandalism, however, it's often better to ignore it. More often than not, they just go away. Giving them a warning, by contrast, sometimes encourages them. I use the templates if I see a second vandalism from the same user, or if they have previous warnings. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Noted. I'd explain that in your edit summary though. Peter Sam Fan 17:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Rather vexingly, the one-click rollback link doesn't give the option of a customized edit summary. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I see your point now. Sorry about the entire thing. Peter Sam Fan 19:15, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
No worries. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. The user was obviously upset over something... Meatsgains (talk) 01:47, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that, i was goofing off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShawcAshley (talkcontribs) 18:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


Please be respectful. Why did you take my father's name off of the Glenboro site? He was responsible for organizing the construction of Sarah The Camel as Mayor of Glenboro. It is worth noting because we in Glenboro respect our history and the people who contribute to it.

Ozcan1981 (talk) 01:00, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy[edit]

Report regarding this article currently on ANI in case you are interested. TimothyJosephWood 17:38, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Louis Ginsberg[edit]

The birth date should be 1895 according to Louis Ginsberg's grandson who corrected my mistake. He sent me a copy of Louis Ginsberg's draft registration. thanksBinaryPhoton (talk) 15:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Budd Hopkins[edit]

Elizabeth Loftus' claims of identifying subtle cues were not corroborated by subsequent research. Her work constituted "original research". "Original research" is not allowed to be used on Wikipedia, whatever its source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

In the first place, you're wrong. Loftus's claims constitute published research. Original research is when you, Mr., come by and make some claim without having a published source to back it up. In the second place, don't complain to me. I'm trying to explain to you the realities of how Wikipedia operates. If you want your claims taken seriously, go to the article's Talk page. If you want to be ignored, keep doing what you're doing. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
(by talk page stalker) @ NewEnglandYankee is correct. The dilettantes that write Wikipedia may not perform original research. Every primary and secondary source that we use here is original research to some extent. If you have an issue with specific sources then address them in kind. The blogs, for example, can be allowable under WP:SELFSOURCE if it's providing simple details from the author which don't seem questionable. Casting aspersions isn't the way to win an argument here; make a case based on policy. If you don't know Wikipedia's sourcing guidelines you would be better off asking at WP:RSN then arguing with actual editors. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, Thank you for your post. The only issues I have with this specific Wikipedia page is its blatant co-option by the "Guerilla Skepticism on Wikipedia" (GSOW) movement headed by Susan Gerbic. I don't have any problems with any Wikipedia users I've encountered. My frustration lies only with the bizarre and contradictory rules regarding what kind of material can be posted. "Original research" is not allowed, yet "original research", of an unsupported and uncorroborated nature, is much of what is listed at this particular Wikipedia page to support biased, pseudoskeptical statements. Proof of the GSOW movement's co-option of this page is present in the edit history (user: Sgerbic) They even take credit for it at their blog ( There is no point arguing with any specific users, few are inclined to listen. I feel what is going on here is a great injustice to the neutrality espoused but not practiced by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

A request...[edit]

I am just a humble anon with some minor wiki experience and I was reading through the page "Politics of North Korea" when I questioned how accurate some of the information was. There were basic grammar errors, it was very meandering and unclear....looking back at the edit history, you removed this particular section as it was essay-like, but it seems as though the same person added it right back after, then someone fixed some technical errors over it so it might have been missed. Thanks! (talk) 01:34, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I fully agree that this content is meandering and unclear and just generally unsuitable. I've re-removed it on that basis. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 01:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


Wikipedia is very difficult for a new user. It seems it is only for geeks. There is hell lot of content on how to post article and what nature, but there is no summary. I think they need to "Give clear guidelines" on how to make the content clear of any commercial bias and how to put content in neutral manner, else it is going to be doomed as no one has the patience to take insults from people, who don't know anything about a particular topic and edit other people stuff

this talk system is beyond understanding of a simple new user, why dont they have a chat?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karansingh47 (talkcontribs)

See WP:TEAHOUSE for a chat. A (terse) intro is provided at the top of your own talk-page. Kleuske (talk) 16:29, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


Jeez dude. Im trying to fix the Randy Gregory page back to the original format from that donaldduckforprez dude because he is defacing the page with 420 puns and shit, yet your accusing me of being the vandal? your just enabling him. theres no such thing as chronic sack or rolled joints in the NFL statlines. Fix it and Fix him.

Harambeswill (talk) 18:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)harambeswill


Sorry for being so rash but as im sure you can see through the history me and him/her have been rapid editing back to back in a little war i guess you could call it. I was one of the IP adresses too and made an account just to deal with it. I thought I caught it all and had a "fixed" copy of the code I was just posting after he would modify. I wasn't sure if there were real mods or editors out there, so next time ill leave stuff like that to the people like you. Thank you though. Sorry again

Harambeswill (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2016 (UTC)harambeswill

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, NewEnglandYankee. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)