User talk:Niteshift36

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

I detest stalkers, especially those who can't get their facts straight.[edit]

Corkscrew store photo[edit]

that would be incredibly cool —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothyapetty (talkcontribs) 01:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


I noticed that you been editing the Gang article . I just created a Portal (Portal:Gang) I need your help. If you have time, Can you help add some content to my portal. I would appreciate it, Thanks.--Zink Dawg -- 06:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Prod on David M. Malone[edit]


Wikiwings2.png Wikiwings
For extraordinary contributions to Aircraft in fiction, thus improving hundreds of aircraft type articles along the way! - Ahunt (talk) 15:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar may be awarded to those that show a pattern of going the extra mile to be nice, without being asked.

This barnstar is awarded to User:Niteshift36, for his dedication to compromise and his ability to work with other editors to come up with amicable solutions which satisfy everyone. Thank you for your valiant efforts to the project. Ikip (talk) 02:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Our earlier disputes[edit]

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png No worries, Niteshift--I was happy to back you up there (that was easy anyway, since you were right). Man, some people need to get out more, so they don't have so many words left when they get here. Cheers! Drmies (talk) 22:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


Thank you, fine by me. Let's move on. ~ Kimelea (talk) 21:12, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png Just from another editor who works on Florida articles. ...William 00:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
You are courageous. MONGO 03:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png More beer! Drmies (talk) 05:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Who doesn't love free beer. :) Niteshift36 (talk) 16:29, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Tell you what, I had the opposite happen tonight. Old neighbor comes by, there's a bottle of champagne, she and Mrs. Drmies claim to be tired etc; by the time they're gone and I'm thinking about finishing that bottle, it's empty after all. Plus they were disrespecting the Clint Eastwood movie I was watching, tsk tsk. Also, I made a promise: to not respond at ANI. Hey, we're all buddy-buddy now, with all this stuff going on, but weren't we in a fight a couple of months ago? Where you were wrong, of course. Later! Drmies (talk) 05:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Team Barnstar Hires.png The Teamwork Barnstar
For working with me on Dave Aronberg article. You've supported him, I was dead set against his most recent bid for office, but we worked together to make the article encyclopedic rather than looking like a press release. ...William 17:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The Good Shephard[edit]

I suppose you think that's funny. It took me all day to transcribe that trash from my TV screen. :) When I wrote that stuff I was a young and foolish 63 year old with a new toy. I am now 64 and a little wiser and I.Won't.Do.It.Again.(promise). That article isn't deserving of all the attention it gets anyhow. The reason for all the caps is that that was how it appeared on the TV. However, there should be a way to cite the credits from a film, or even scenes in it. Could you point me in the right direction on that? If I change my mind after all when I know how to do it and put the music back in I hope you won't come after me with your nightstick! Please accept this with a good heart, I don't think much of stalkers either. :) Jodosma (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Apologies (Re RSN)[edit]

Hi. I'd like to apologise for my behaviour in the recent RSN on Hazel Kirk. I think that my behaviour went over the line on multiple occasions in the way that I addressed you and your arguments. I don't mean this from the perspective of an online civility "policy", but just in terms of how one should normally address another human being. Normally I find it easy enough to deescalate in those kinds of situations; unfortunately I didn't in this instance. Sorry again for my remarks, including my initial one, many of which were unfair, rude and condescending. FiachraByrne (talk) 21:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Something up your alley....maybe[edit]

The Dallas Police Department article's misconduct section could use serious cleanup. I worked on the killing of Santos Rodriguez section but its probably imperfect because this is not my expertise. Thought you might want to give the article a try....William 23:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

bb'ing boxes[edit]

Hi; I see you're one of the only active people on WP:Bodybuilding and showed up of course on the blacklisting bulletin board...... I was just fixing up the Tommi Thorvildsen article and his (Tommi's) inclusion of stats/facts including his motto makes me wonder if there's an "infobox athlete" or if we could concoct an "infobox bodybuilder" that we could come up with for stuff like that. Also in all cases, to make allowances re COI/AUTO for them to be able to cite their own websites; his own website is used as a citation about it, right off its main page is a product page so I'm going to adjust it to his "Om oss" (about us) page so it doesn't get treated like spam. Which is is, but self-spam is part of the bb game anyway huh? Strikes me that anything in that bio that's not in other sites is useful, depite the self-citation interdictions usual in Wikipedia.Skookum1 (talk) 22:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Seems maybe there should be a bodybuilder subsection on WP:ATHLETE too.Skookum1 (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure why it got listed as a spam site in the first place. I don't really know anything about infoboxes etc. You might be interested in this discussion in 2011 about including bodybuilders in ATHLETE [1]. The problem is, most of the people with an opinion don't really know anything about the sport. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Request, please[edit]

It's possible we're talking past each other at WP:BLPN. I think it might be helpful to talk specifically. Yesterday, I made this edit. I tried very hard to follow the sources as precisely as possible, to state only the facts, exactly as they were reported and to avoid coloring my reporting in any way. This is why it took me all day to research and write three paragraphs. Montanabw then completely revised it. I don't think he made it one bit better. May I ask your opinion, please? Msnicki (talk) 14:41, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

  • My opinion is that both entries put in too much info. The incident does merit inclusion. But at this point, it's an allegation. It should be 3-4 sentences at best. Talking about possible penalties etc isn't called for yet. If and when an investigation determines there was plagiarism, then it can be expanded. You've got almost as much material on this allegation as there is on TWO proven incidents by Joe Biden. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion help[edit]

Niteshift36 - You have just marked redirect pages for globalvcard and global-fleet for speedy deletion. These redirects were certainly not attempts to 'game the search engines' as stated. This is simply an attempt to redirect brand names owned by CSI Enterprises to a single article. I did not feel there was enough material to support three separate articles, yet users that may search for either of these names will be looking for the same company. You can see all three references within the main article, as well as the corporate websites provided. If there is better way of handling this, I would appreciate your suggestions. Thank you. KristiGNA (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Kristi, they are gaming the search engines and InGage knows this. Of course there isn't material for separate articles because they're not notable on their own. These terms are very unlikely as search terms in an encyclopedia. On Google, perhaps, but not an encyclopedia. But creating your redirects essentially does create an article and Wikipedia articles rank high in Google returns. Then you redirect those trademark terms to that PR piece on the company. Re-writing that, and the article on InGage, to make them more encyclopedic and less sales pitch, is now on my list. You might want to review WP:NOPAY, since you're editing on behalf of a company for a client. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:31, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Fuck off...or on...or...whatever (I curse way too much)[edit]

Take your happy ass over to No Gun Ri Massacre. We're having a slug fest on the talk page. I needs moar uninvolved third party editors. We have three from MILHIST, but more is better. We've also been discussing this on Irondome's talk. Also I'm totally calling in a favor from helping at the Panama stuff. What are friends for if not to involve themselves in discussions that they are completely uninitiated to. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 04:45, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Just some context. Hanley is a super important (bow to me) Pulitzer winner on the subject, who seems to think this is a Holocaust level event (tip, it's not). WeldNeck is a guy who thinks that the US military never killed an innocent squirrel because they wandered onto a shooting range (can personally attest this is not true). Timothyjosephwood (talk) 04:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Holy cow......what a mess. I need more coffee.....I'm trying to slog through this and see what has already been settled. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Also, just to be clear, I'm trying to bring you to the page because I know you are an active editor on MILHIST. I am not trying to canvass. Feel free to tell me I am an idiot if you feel I am wrong. Rest assured, I will call you bad names and show you how you are wrong, as situation dictates. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It looks to me like you guys are on a productive track at this point, one issue at a time. I see what you mean about the personality types. Is there a specific part you think I'd be helpful in? Niteshift36 (talk) 19:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

PC reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

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

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

See also:

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Scott Disick[edit]

This article has been re-created and is at AfD for the fourth time. Your comments will be welcome. I am notifying everyone who contributed to the previous AfDs. JohnCD (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2015 (UTC)


I regret my comment on the Gotay AfD. I though I was clear that I had no issue with the edits just wanted to make the point that huge changes to the article during the debate adds some difficulty. I did not expect the comment to be twisted quite so much.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

  • No worries. We have no issues between us. We may disagree sometimes, but I respect you as an editor and what you do with MA articles. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:55, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Never thought we did.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


There is a discussion on Bishonen's talk page that might interest you and is related to you. Take a guess what it is about...TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

...Nevermind, CA again "retired", no doubt to avoid punishment. Word of advice, CA brought up a third account he planned to use. No name was identified, but be on the lookout for similar editing patterns, he has done this once before. Take care and thanks for confronting the issues he caused.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! On WikiProject Cities Maps --Cs california (talk) 06:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I apologize for the change[edit]

I see you already had that out a few years back. And yes, that exchange was cut the last time I saw it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


In File:WashJeffFootball.JPG, nothing is copyrightable: the object itself is functional and unoriginal, and the text "Washington & Jefferson College" is too simple for copyright. See Commons:Template:PD-text for that situation. Your photo, on the other hand, is of a 60-word chunk of text: a piece of this length is easily copyrightable, and the sign's date of erection (1998) is twenty years too late for {{PD-US-no notice}}. Nobody has any rights over WashJeffFootball.JPG except for the photographer, but you've infringed on the copyright of the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission by reproducing their copyrighted work without permission. Nyttend (talk) 04:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Please read the copyright article. The four words "Washington and Jefferson College" cannot by themselves be copyrighted: the phrase is far too simple. Moreover, the phrase "Washington and Jefferson College" was first published before 1923, so even if it had once been copyrighted, it's passed into the public domain. Let me remind you, however, that if you believe it still to be copyrighted, that you're obligated to stop using it outside of mainspace: copyrighted nonfree content, which by your concept includes this phrase, may not appear on project pages and user talk pages. This is such a foundational concept that this explanation cannot go farther until you've begun to understand what copyright is. Nyttend (talk) 12:38, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
And re your second comment, the point is that facts cannot be copyrighted: you can't sue someone for saying that such-and-such happened. This is completely different from the words used to explain those facts: read idea-expression divide. If you disagree, please see what happens when you reproduce a recently published nonfiction book through a Commons PDF. Moreover, anything copyrightable published post-1978 is automatically copyrighted, without need for a copyright claim or anything else on the part of the publisher. Nyttend (talk) 12:41, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes. It's under copyright. For the third time, anything copyrightable published post-1978 is automatically copyrighted unless the author renounces copyright, and unless you can provide explicit proof that the state has renounced copyright over its historical markers, you've violated our copyright policy, as well as infringing copyright and opening yourself to a lawsuit by the state. Nyttend (talk) 12:53, 30 July 2015 (UTC)