Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Tbhotch. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:TheDutchessEp.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
February 2010
52nd Grammy Awards
Why would we even think of removing the nominees that didn't win? That is a disservice not only to the still-honored singers, songwriters, etc., but to our readers. I understand that previous Grammys also do not show the nominees, but this must be changed. I have started a thread at Talk:52nd Grammy Awards. Thanks, Reywas92Talk01:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK
Being curious I looked at a recently deleted DYK nomination, and it seems you posted a DYK nomination, but for the wrong thing. You listed the new article as Up (2009 film), while I think you meant to use Up (soundtrack). I was tempted to try and nominate Up (soundtrack) myself but it's too short: < 1000 characters of prose but it needs at least 1500. It also needs references for the 'thematic transformation' point, so would fail without some work to improve it.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds12:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Non-free files in your userspace
Hey there, this is just a notification that I commented out the use of non-free files on your userpage. Per our restrictive non-free content criteria policy, non-free content must be used in very limited places—basically, it can only be used in article namespace. If you would like to list the files on your userpage, please place a colon before the beginning brackets and the file.
For example, placing the following on your userpage:
Again, I've added a colon to these images so they don't display. Please remember that non-free images are not allowed in user space. — ξxplicit20:40, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
laundry Service
My links are official! Sources: linklink And find the certifications. Are you blind??? Please, accept the truth. Genieofmusic (talk) 15:427, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Accept the facts. Check the certifications! And I have besides my BMI source, the source of Shakira's OFFICIAL site. You just have one. Deal with it. Genieofmusic (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Hola, la página de discusión de Laundry service si existe lo que pasa es que debe estar en los archivos y por eso no lo encuentras. Ese tema se ha discutido muchas veces y se ha llegado a la conclusión de que no se puede confiar mucho en las webs de los artistas pòrque tiende a inflar las ventas. es por eso que se confía más en el reporte de BMI que dice que las ventas de ese disco son 13 millones. Ahora no tengo mucho tiempo, pero mañana buscaré en los archivos la discusión sobre este tema. De momento creo que deberías dejar las ventas en 13 millones hasta que se discuta. alguien podría molestarse y decir que lo que haces es vandalismo. Gracias por tu mensaje, veo que hablas español. chao--Albes29 (talk) 23:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
just FYI.. I opened a sock puppet investigation/check user on 118.90.20.53 plus another IP and one user that's always editing the Kelly Clarkson articles in the same mannor. the mentioned IP claiming to have edited before, when the history only goes back a couple of days is suspicious, but we'll know after the check. If you want to add any comments or proof you may have, here's the investiagtion: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kcfan90. The users have not been notified in case it comes out negative during the check, they may take it the wrong way when it's not a big deal if there's no sock puppet Alan - talk03:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:I got you music video LL.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:I got you music video LL.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
I agree, but I was trying to place it in a position where it would be noticed quickly. Sometime soon, i hope to repair some of it myself.76.226.96.194 (talk) 03:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
82nd Academy Awards
why did you remove star trek award I've just added to the academy awards??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mic of orion (talk • contribs)
Dear Mr. Unknown: Star Trek didn't win or do any NOTABLE unlike other pictures, also, who put it marked Star Trek as a Best Picture nominee.TbhotchTalk2 Me16:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Are you taking a piss, and don't call me unknown have some respect, or I will report you to the admins and have you banned from editing wiki, and I mean main admin (owners) in US.
Star trek won the award, all movies that have won the awards have been listed, so I see no reason for Star Trek not be listed as well, after all "Up in the air", didn't won a single award and it is there. So stop that nonsense, unless you wish me to go to further with this and have you reported for vandalizing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mic of orion (talk • contribs)
stop spamming my inbox, you have issues talk on 82md awards discussion page, Star Trek won the Oscar for best make up, which is 1 more than what Up in the air did, and was nominated for 3 more Oscars which it didn’t won.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:AmericanLifeLive.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Whilst i agree that twitter is not a good source the picture clearly shows a HMV store where the cover is the official single art cover. It is the contents which is most important. Often songs recieve a promo cover and then a proper cover upon CD release. This is widespread practise. Therefore i've reverted your reversion. Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
left you a response on the talk page because i dont think you understood the issue but at the same time are making the same point as me.Lil-unique1 (talk) 03:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
No, I reverted it. Regardless of what the history says. I pushed the wrong button--save instead of show preview. Now y'all stop harrassing me for an innocent mistake. You don't like it, kiss my ass. InFairness (talk) 01:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
"According to the History, I reverted you edition. "
Pop Songs reverts to Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs). Via consensus this is the name we've settled on because the two billboard sites (.com / .biz) refer to it as Pop Songs or Mainstream Top 40. Because there was no preference either way it was decided to name it both. As per WP:USCHARTS which contains the charts with their officially approved names. Lil-unique1 (talk) 02:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
All I Ever Wanted (Kelly Clarkson song)
Leona Lewis's song ahd more coverage.. This single barely has any (it's not even getting a music video). unfortunatley, not all singles become notable, in spite of what fans wish for Alan - talk05:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
P.S. the Leona song you linked to saying it never charted, did chart in multiple countries.. as for the Clarkson song, it doesn't even have album art, all the images being put up for it's cover are fan-made using photoshop back in January and February (yes, wikipedia ads that data when images are uploaded) Alan - talk05:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
You're probably right about it never getting coverage.. but then again, it can still chart on a major chart since it's on the component charts now, and getting enough airplay, only time will tell. Alan - talk05:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Tbhotch. You have new messages at WP:RPP. Message added 04:38, 3 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
On 5 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Baja California earthquake, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
Thank you for this. That IP has a lengthy history of not adhering to policy, especially the WP:RS. They only start to respond when the article they're warring on gets protection. Anyhow, thanks again. It can get tiresome defending that article :) Pinkadelica♣01:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
A lot of juvenile- and youth-themed movie articles were under attack. I'll go ahead and lift the block. Thanks for letting me know. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
You got it. In fact, I am trying to work with the vandal in question since he's showing a willingness to change. Here's hoping... PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
My contribution to the Wikipedia entry "bucket seats" was completely worthwhile and valid. It does not surprise me to find it policed and redacted on a website frequented by pavid vermin such as yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.36.97.101 (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Merriam-Webster goes on to say: "...traditionally, however, only the apostrophe is added when the s would not be pronounced in normal speech".
I would venture to say that most people say "Douglas-es", therefore an apostrophe is mandatory.
Please do not change this again--I will simply change it back. This is an important point of English grammar that goes back to Shakespeare's time and is gradually being lost on the world, the editorial policies of Time Magazine and The Wall Street Journal notwithstanding.
Cbrodersen (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I did a pretty severe edit on the Reza Pahlavi page as you were doing yours. Not trying to war with you, but I am trying to reduce the self-promotion of the page as it existed. Have a good night! PR (talk) 05:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
This ip has the same editing pattern as aradic-es and pushes the same pov in the football riots article. [2] If you would take a closer look at his nonsensical edits you would notice he has added latin, changed the demographics, and added unsourced information. ◅ PRODUCER(TALK)18:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
very funny! If you take a look a revert... you will see
see the article Muslims by nationality-prior 1991 there were no any "Bosniaks" there.Referring them as Bosniaks is unsourced and his WP:OR
just look at the official source . No "Bošnjaci" but "Muslimani".So, his version is
also leaving spam amoung external links is good thing???
Latin name of place is valid information as any alternative name.
Therefore only vandal in this situation is PRODUCER and I suggest you not to follow his pattern!
Trivia
There are notable events sections in other Oscar ceremony articles. I'm not trying to create a trivia section. I'm trying to give information on details. Here are other example:
Thanks for uploading File:Salvadorcabañas es+.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 72.88.38.50 (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Lady Gaga and RedOne
Hi there, please do not refer Lady Gaga and RedOne as "Stefani Germanotta" and "Nadir Khayat". If this is not changed in due course, I shall have to report you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlieJS13 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about listing that, I thought if it was creation-protected it showed up on the log here [5], didn't realize it only shows up on the public log at [6]. mauler90 (talk) 00:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Just wondering if you're using automated tools to leave warnings? I noticed this [8], which is a warning on an accounts talk page, but for some reason the Shared IP notice dropped in? Burpelson AFB (talk) 00:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Is there a reason why he/she was removing comments from your page? I'm considering taking out an ANI/edit war report out against him/her because he/she has failed to respond to discussions about crediting Gaga's songwriting on Telephone as her birth name and i would like to know if his edits to your page were deliberate or not. They will form part of the report.Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Is it a new agreed-upon thing to re-arrange RFPP to bring unaddressed requests to the top, or did you unilaterally decide that was a good idea? I'm not so sure about it; it messes up the timelines. Tan | 3915:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
I just wanted to thank you for getting Saw VII protected for two weeks. Every time I ask for protection it's two or three days! Ugh. I guess it depends on the admin (Fastily is awesome though). Just wanted to come by and tell you that. :) —MikeAllen06:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- I would advise you to change the songwriter row about Lady Gaga immediately. The song articles were perfect before you came along and changed them. Please change them back to Lady Gaga and RedOne respectively. CharlieJS13 (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Vandalise
Then I will have no choice other than to contact an administrator for unreliably sourced information on the song articles. CharlieJS13 (talk) 18:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Brexx edits
Brexx isn't permitted to contribute. His contributions to articles can stand if another editor stands behind them, but his participation on talk pages serve no purpose whatsoever. The only time an article on a talk page should stand is if another editor has already responded to it. In this case, there had been no response.
Bear in mind that the goal is to have Brexx leave. Anything which provides him encouragement works against that.—Kww(talk) 18:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Your warning re removal of poorly sourced material on living persons
Re this
No, content was about living persons. Please see WP:BLP: "Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced...The three-revert rule does not apply to such removals." 92.30.16.168 (talk) 20:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
About "edit war" and [SpinWatch]
Dear Tbhotch,
Thank you for your message. I really do not want to be in an edit war. I don't think that the material I added was wrong or malicious, just giving a broader idea of what [SpinWatch] was about. I would have liked to have collaborated with 92.30.16.168, but he or she just deleted everything I added, without any attempt at trying to find a middle ground. I will take your point to heart, and ask 92.30.16.168 to suggest an alternative wording.Murray McDonald (talk) 20:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
How did I vandalize
I apologize for not signing my post before. You have marked me down for vandalism, but I do not know on what. Please respond on my talk page with what I vandalized. Iankap99 Iankap99 21:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
You're not the only one. He's also been vandalizing the Lady Gaga song articles too by changing the stage names to the real names. They used to be perfect, but because of him, they don't look the same. CharlieJS13 (talk18:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know, you didn't has been vandalizing Wikipedia. Could you bee a little more explicit in which article I said that? TbhotchTalk C. 00:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
"This might be my fault, but on the vandalism watch thats on my profile it says "Moderate vandalism at this moment." with your signature after it." —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Iankap99 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Ogg
To create an Ogg music file, I use Audacity. It's kind of like Windows Movie Maker for music. If you import an MP3 music file onto Audacity, you are able to cut and chop the file to the correct size and then export it as an OggVorbis file, which you can then upload to Wikipedia. Pyrrhus1616:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Tbhotch. Just thought i'd let you know that if you haven't already it might be a good idea to set up this to help maintain your talk page. it will archive your old/depreciated discussions automatically. Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Dakin oxidation
I really appreciate the help, but the Dakin oxidation article is a project for my organic chemistry class. Since we are graded by what's actually posted to Wikipedia, in the name of academic integrity, please stop editing the page. I know it's not perfect, but I'm trying to make it as close as possible. It's due on May 7th, so feel free to make any changes you'd like after that date. Thanks,
Thanks for undoing my edit on WP:RFPP. I reported the two pages, then accidentally hit the [rollback (VANDAL)] button on twinkle. I quickly closed the page, and I thought it had stopped, but apparently not. Thanks again, --The HighFinSpermWhale05:23, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello! When the creator blanks a page, as he did here, the better course of action is to tag it for speedy deletion under criterion G7, not rollback the edit. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
What’s wrong with my edit to The Blind Side(film)? How ‘s it unconstructive? When I watched the film, the beginning showed Michael & the investigator talking to each other. Next, it showed the flashback. It was important info. When I edited The Blind Side(film), I added that important info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanford West (talk • contribs) 19:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Another message
Oh my gosh! Don't you think that was important info? Since I feel it's important, I feel it should be in the article. If you feel it's not important info, then how come? Also, if you feel that info shouldn't be in the article, then how come? When I edited, the total amount of words was less than 1000 & none of it was bad language & it wasn't slang. (Hanford West (talk) 20:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)).
Please don't edit war with the helperbot. I've reblocked with talk page disabled. In the future, please report to WP:ANI. Thanks. Tim Song (talk) 04:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I am discussing, but the user is simply saying that I am owning the article and removing sourced content! Where else have I removed sourced content except that link-rot? He himself is introducing erroneous format names, remvoing the actual format versions and creating sections which are unnecessary. I accept that he wants a section called Adaptations, but why is it needed for just two three lines? I renamed the covers section as covers and adaptations' but the user did not check any of it, just blatantly reverted, in the process misusing Rollback (which shouldn't be used for content dispute). --Legolas(talk2me)04:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Well I felt that the changes you did were superb and it was almost GA. In course of time I'll try to chip in the article and spruce it up to GA standards, lets see. At present too busy with Madonna bio being nominated for FA and the Madonna's first album as GT.
I had to revert this edit. It was pure vandalism. I just understood that the user, under the pretext of developing the article, is actually inserting the following unsourced content: The song was once again covered by the American post-hardcore band, Of Mice & Men; it has not yet been featured on a release but is featured as streaming media online and has received much traffic since its upload. Faith No More occasionally perform a cover of "Poker Face" at live performances. I think we have to go to WP:ANI. No hard feelings for the warning though. --Legolas(talk2me)05:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Come to think of it, your warning me of 3RR was bit premature as I did not do three reverts in 24 hrs time. The last revert was done on 11th May. I just did two reverts today. --Legolas(talk2me)05:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
(Outdent) Do you think that notifying others of removing sourced content, when someone themself is adding a block of unsourced content is a good faith edit? I really smell a WP:ATTP in it. I won't be reverting any further but if I see such additions, i will be compelled to raise a WP:ANI. --Legolas(talk2me)06:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Cyril Smith edit ...
I noted that none of the comments in the personality section are accredited. At least my comment is, in that I was employed by the BBC at the time (Senior Engineer, BBC News and Current Affairs). I am puzzled as to why you removed it - especially as it is relavent to his personality. I would expect references to all the other comments "Hot Dinners" and "Taxis" for example to be accredited if the reason for the removal of my comment is simply down to lack of accreditation. Kind regards Zenotype (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Tbhotch. You may have noticed that I placed a warning on 122.3.179.209's talk page after you reverted 122.3.179.209's edit on Severe acute respiratory syndrome. I just realized that I intended to place a warning on 166.217.203.75's talk page, but instead, I placed it on 122.3.179.209's talk page! Sorry about that! --Can You Prove That You're Human (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
I am sorry but the fact of the matter is that women are predominantly in the kitchen. This is not unbiased in anyway and as this is an encyclopedia, I would have thought you and the other Wikipedia editors would to add extra information when necessary and my contribution was valid and necessary.
No, it was already discussed and agreed that the proper term for is australian articles it football (soccer), not association football. Some people have blatently ignored it and I am correcting it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.3.243 (talk) 05:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Football soccer is not a word. Football (soccer) is referring to which foootball code it is. Like I said football (soccer) not football soccer has already been agreed as the term for AUSTRALIAN articles. Whatever the term for internation articles is nothing to do with me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.3.243 (talk) 05:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, mind to explain why you reverted me on Karabakh Khanate?
Before reverting check editing history and revert yourself. It would also help to read the talkpage, where it is shown that the source does not support what is claimed and that's why it was removed. Ionidasz (talk) 01:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, in order to you to know about the changes I made in the past few days, you should know about the Spanish language rules for the use of the Capital letters in the names or titles, it is totally incorrect in Spanish to use all the words in the same name (initial) in capitals, only the first one is able to use it that way, it is different in English (you should learn the reason in the edit summary box) I changed the Spanish title of some songs names not the english title, so it is not incorrect, do you know the Spanish Gramatical and Ortographical rules?.Best Regards.Eduardosalg (talk) 16:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for answer me; I do understand you, but despite the Covers are totally written in Capital letters it is an incorrect way to do; I do not know about the Convention Titles in the English Wikipedia; but in the Spanish we do not use the fully capital letters form, just the initial one, also to use all the initial letter in capital is incorrect in our language (just for a proper name, example John Doe); do not worry I do not have enough time to contribute in different projects, if you believe it is correct to use that form it is right for me; thank you again and best regards.Eduardosalg (talk) 16:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks It appears by my count that there are roughly 6,000 good articles that lack this template, so I decided to pitch in with WP:AWB. I'd like to suggest it to you, because I think it will be faster than editing by hand. I've simply alphabetized every article within Category:Wikipedia good articles and its subcategories and started at Z. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm planning to make this article a GA one. Can you help me? I mean can you advise and give me an idea of what i have to do? The article is already quite good but it is known as C-Class and HALO is so good, despite of this it is a B-Class article. Help me a bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jivesh boodhun (talk • contribs)
I am extremely sorry for such late reply. There was complete blackout in Mauritius due to major road works over the island. (talk • contribs)
RfPP
Hey, if you get something crazy like that in future, drop a note on my talk page as well- if I'm on, it'll be done instantly and the worst case scenario is I don't see it in time and someone else will probably protect it. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree with what you say; I know the rules, I'm just not as active as you. But don't pretend to be the overlord of Wikipedia; you were both a willing participant and we were both equally correct. I neither personally know Ms. Valentine, nor am I partial to her over Bullock; I simply know the story and realized the discussion regarding her and Bullock/James was neither neutral nor verified. The articles make an allegation as opposed to a verification. Therefore, inclusion of her name while alleging a non-existent positive was simply fixed by the addition of neutrality. Try to see both sides next time. Thanks for doing what you do.
WHERE IS THE MESSAGE?????????????????????????????????????
Thanks
Question
Hello, I do have a question; It is OK if I do add the references to the articles in Spanish language? I do have some of them but obtained of the Spanish language sources.Thank you in advance and best regards.Eduardosalg (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, I am a arolbacker in the Spanish Wiki as you are here; I will add the references in one article and do appreciate if you will check them later.Regards.Eduardosalg (talk) 17:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Uploading A Picture for the music video of Sweet dreams
Can you upload a picture for the video? I don't know how to do that. There was one before but it has been removed. I don't know why. (Jivesh boodhun (talk) 19:40, 5 June 2010 (UTC))
I'll never reveal all of his tells. Sooner or later, he will figure out how to disguise himself perfectly. In a very real sense, that will be a good day: if he edits so well no one can tell he's Brexx, there's no reason to block him.—Kww(talk) 17:25, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello Tbhotch. I developed the prior list as per FL criterias and have nominated it as such. Would you care to comment at its nominations page? Regards --Legolas(talk2me)11:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
I AM...SASHA FIERCE
HI, haven't heard from you since so long. Hope you are doing great. Actually i wanted to know what the article lacks to pass for GA now? It is already so good. And everything has been completed. (Jivesh boodhun (talk) 16:34, 10 June 2010 (UTC))
Hi, i have been told that the album lacks information but when i asked what it lacks, no one wants to reply. Please help me. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 06:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, a copy-edit has already been made by Lil-Unique1. And please don't embarass me by telling that you are sorry. I appreciate you a lot. I will always be grateful to you for your patience and precious help. Thanks for everything. You are just too nice. Thanks again. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 06:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, hope you are very fine. Please don't take me wrong but do you really think that the article is too long? I mean to say that it'a a double album, that's why it appears too long. It is not actually one but two albums in one itself. Don't you think so? Jivesh boodhun (talk) 10:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I am deeply sorry for not contributing to the album for the time being. Actually, my grandfather just passed away. He died today itself. Please try to understand. See you later. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi i hope you are fine. Well i have seen that many Ga lbums have an awards section without nominations. The table shows only the awards WON by the album. Can i create one for the album? I also want you to know that my keyboard is not working properly for the time being. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 07:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
I have been told that the only thing the album lacks is a proper formatting of references. I have already started the work and i have fixed all dead links today itself. The copy edit has already been done. Can you help me to format the references? Please help me to make it pass GA. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I Look to You
Thanks for conducting the review. I've gone ahead and done those changes asked of me. If you could take a look and reassess that would be brilliant. Regards, Lil-unique1 (talk) 18:34, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Be careful, but if you are positive it is him, say "Reverting sock of User:Speed 108" in your edit summary. That will alert admins that you are doing sock reversion.—Kww(talk) 05:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Would it not have been better to write to me on my talk page and ask me why I made a change rather than clumsily reverting it? I happened to find it a week later and had to fix my own comment as it had been damaged by the reversions. I hope you show more good faith in future. Orderinchaos12:47, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
This song featured on the EP I Am...Sasha Fierce released in 2010 has become very popular in Korea and has reached number 1. So do you think we should create a page for it?
I saw on the talkpage of "HALO" that you aren't understanding something. I will help you in 15 hours. For now, i am leaving for school. Regards. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 02:47, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Why Don't You Love Me
Hi, hope you are fine? The song has really debuted at #73 in Australia. http://ariacharts.com.au/pages/chartifacts.htm
This website will be updated next week, so it will be better to have an archive from "Pandora". Also see the cover (on the website itself). The previous cover was the good one but it has been deleted. Can it be re-inserted?
(Jivesh boodhun (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC))
Hi, hope you are fine? The song has really debuted at #73 in Australia. http://ariacharts.com.au/pages/chartifacts.htm
This website will be updated next week, so it will be better to have an archive from "Pandora". This is becuase the Chartifact page of ARIA is updated every week. We need a reference from Pandora.com just like "Video Phone" has one. (Jivesh boodhun (talk) 07:29, 20 June 2010 (UTC))
Re: Your GA nomination of Music of Final Fantasy XIII
I have addressed all of your concerns about the article, and it is ready for another look. --PresN01:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Audiosharx
Hi, I wasn't trying to advertise anything I was just stating fact, Audiosharx who are one of my favourite rock bands did a cover of that song, just look on YouTube —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audiosharx (talk • contribs) 20:23, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I made almost all the changes to the article that were described on that page. As for the sources for the "personnel" section, I left a hidden comment saying that it was derrived from the album's booklet on the article. • GunMetal Angel22:10, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, hope you are fine? The song has really debuted at #73 in Australia. http://ariacharts.com.au/pages/chartifacts.htm It will be better to have an archive from "Pandora.com". This is becuase the Chartifact page of ARIA is updated every week. We need a reference from Pandora.com just like "Video Phone" has one. I do not have access to this website. See if you can get one for last week i mean 15.06.10 Jivesh boodhun (talk) 12:24, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
I am so happy HALO finally passed for GA. I am very happy. It is all thanks to you. You are a great person. Now will you help me with "Sweet Dreams"? And we need a reference from Pandora.com for "Why Don't You Love Me"? Jivesh boodhun (talk) 19:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Please please send me the link of Pandora.com of this week after that the website is updated tomorrow. The song debuted at #73, now i want to know its position of this week. By the way, i saw on "Hung Mediven" that the song has so far been released in Australia and Belgium. Please do not forget to send me the link tomorrow. I am never able to get access to it directly. Thanks in advance. Goodnight. Jivesh boodhun (talk) 19:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Morenooso (talk·contribs) has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
protection templates in templates
If you include a protection template in a template it doesn't work properly. It makes every article that includes the template appear to be semi-protected. There's a fancy way to get around it with special include/noinclude keywords, but I've never found it to be worth the effort.—Kww(talk) 21:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Edison…
…is the correct name of Pele. I advise you to first check the font cited – the movie "Pelé Eterno". It shows Pele's original birth certificate. Cheers. --Tonyjeff (talk) 22:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
If your best argument for "Edson" is "search in Google", then you should stop editing Wikipedia -- specially if you use the same references for "Edison" to justify "Edson"... In the movie "Pele Eterno" it is shown his birth certificate. No matter "Edson" is more known, his real name is "Edison". Please, try to use better references... --Tonyjeff (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I am just asking you to be a little bit more honest. You changed an information keeping the same sources used by the information before -- this is really bad and manaces the trustability of Wikipedia. When I decided to put that, I searched many fonts to finally understand what would be the correct thing to do. Let's be more serious. --Tonyjeff (talk) 19:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
You may be bold, but keep one source to justify another information is not exactly "be bold". Appart from that, revert my edition without talking to me, even after I've tried to reach you in a friendly way, is not "be bold". Try to find any page named "be honest". --Tonyjeff (talk) 22:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to real world. He attacked me at WP:EN when he suggests that I'm spamming some hoax. I did not attacked him when I say that he's ignorant about one fact (ignorant: does not know something). Again, you're lacking some honesty when treating with me. Would that be a persecution? --Tonyjeff (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
After he accuses me of making a hoax? Yes: learn to respect others would be a good idea. "Ignorant: lacking knowledge, information or awareness about something" (Oxford American Dictionary). Maybe you use a specific dictionary, don't you? Tonyjeff (talk) 16:24, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Other user accuses me of vandalism and hoax, promote a war edition and you say that I am offending and disrupting. I think your point of view is more and more interesting – maybe because he acts exactly as you. And, if you have not noticed, I have already dropped the stick, since I stopped answering Futbolero's provocations. I think you should start to listen your own advices – you are not in position to give me any suggestion.
But, finally, we agree with something: WP:ES is not reliable. They simple invalidate a reference stating that it is a hoax (with no evidence) and invalidate an user stating that he is a vandal and has occult interests (with no evidence). They state that the fonts are available only for me (when anyone may watch the movie and request a copy of his birth certificate – I gave all the infos of the registry of Três Corações) and state that, since everyone call him by one way, that should be the right way. Excelent! I am really done. --Tonyjeff (talk) 17:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Tbhotch, when you reverted my rollback, you asked Exactly, Why this is wrong?. The edit inserted a <ref> within a lengthy reference. It is a reference which itself includes now a reference which is, however, not properly nested. As we do not have nested reference anyway, the inner <ref> has to go. See also my explanation at User talk:Explained Cause. Please revert your revert of my edit. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 05:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC) P.S. Please respond here.
The martin luther edit
Sorry for any confusion on this, I originally accepted then had to revert your edit. Your edit summary asked why it was wrong, the edit produces a red reference error in the middle of the article. The reason it needs to be "See" and not "ref" is that we're already inside of a previous ref tag from about twenty-thirty words earlier. My apologies for any confusion. --j⚛e deckertalk06:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Mistaken rollback
Sorry about that revert...my browser was lagging and I somehow accidentally clicked rollback :( —DoRD (talk) 21:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I had to smile
Hello Tbhotch. I had to smile at the Homer Simpson ref in your edit summary here [9]. Actually I had to smile at both edit summaries. I was tracking edits by a known sock puppet master and when I checked the one on this page out I had to do a double take and double check before I knew what part of the article the section removal had occurred in. Thanks for your vigilance in checking both edits to get to the bottom of things. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk21:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I didn't make it the template. Thanks for fixing that for me. =) (BTW, if you reply, please do so here. It is not necessary, however, as this is a mere thank you.) CycloneGU (talk) 06:53, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi i hope you are doing well. Can you tell me what happened with the user Legolas? I felt a bit strange. Perhaps he is taking me for another person.
Please explain to me what actually happened. Thanks Jivesh boodhun (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:TheDutchessEp.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
A lot of information has been removed by a user known as Jeremystalked. He did that as he was saying that people magazine is not reliable. So, a veteran user cleared his misunderstandings on his talkpage and told him to insert those information back. He didn't do it. He has been editing on May 27, 2010 only. What can we do? Jivesh boodhun (talk) 12:11, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
OnePt618 has given you a pie! Pies promote the kind of hearty eating that puts a smile on your face and a sustaining meal in your stomach. Hopefully this pie has made your day better. Spread the goodness by giving someone else a pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!
Spread the goodness of pie by adding {{subst:Wikipie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey, thanks for doing the GA review for Telethon (Parks and Recreation). Sorry I didn't reply sooner, I've been swamped in real life lately and haven't checked Wikipedia in a while. I fully intend to address your GAN concerns as soon as possible, but might need a couple days before I can get to it. Just wanted to let you know so you didn't think I disappeared and failed the GAN. I'll let you know once I've made the changes. Thanks again! — HunterKahn19:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
But I put the reference, is number two. Remember to be positively identified when sending a message to me. Thank you and be more attentive.*Fr@nkl!nG* (talk) 21:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay, but one way or another the link is reliable. She is the type of artist who wants to be alone in the cliché, for example only post news on the main page ...
Finally, the source is reliable and so voi edit again and no rule of Wikipedia says that the links have to be the main pages of a site. Spare me the stupid things.*Fr@nkl!nG* (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Soccer is understood and unambiguous. Football is ambiguous, to at least some audiences. Whichever it's termed in South Africa itself, "soccer" is more readable worldwide (i.e. to Americans) and "soccer" isn't unusual enough to risk confusion.
Secondly, soccer is the more common form in South Africa (AFAIR), although it's a distant third behind their real sports of rugby and cricket. As I've never heard "rugby football" used in South Africa (simply "rugby"), I doubt they use soccer as the Americans do though, to distinguish. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleting content without verifying if its present or not is constitured vandalism and Rollback is not a misuse in this case. A look at that user's contribution shows that we have a case of another Petergriffin, but albeit a Janet fan. Case closed. --Legolas(talk2me)04:07, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Sorry TB, I just realised that I might have come off quite rude to you, you are trying to do good actually. I realise why the use of Rollback in this case might have come off as misuse to you. Again I apologize for my sudden outburst to you. --Legolas(talk2me)04:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I was just wondering if you are still reviewing the article? It's just that it's been well over a week now since you placed the review peice on the GAN's page. Thankyou. RAIN the ONE(Talk)21:38, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I see you have reverted the edits I have done. But I only put the unofficial web site because Crash Bandicoot allows it. So is Selena the only page not allowed to have sites like that? AJona1992 (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh ok I see, but I didn't know of that, so I don't want to be known as a vandel because I didn't know, I just saw that the article had that so I thought it was ok, thanks for letting me know AJona1992 (talk) 19:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
intro to Invincible album (michael jackson)
how about a combination like " is the final album in his lifetime, all further albums would be compilations" this would reflect a compromise of both our ideas listed in the discussion section.--65.10.1.97 (talk) 16:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
INSTEAD of... "Invincible is the tenth album by American recording artist Michael jackson,and the last non-compilation album of his music to be released before his death in 2009." why not adjust it so that it reads..."Invincible is the last album by American recording artist Michael Jackson in his lifetime,and the last non-compilation album."...this would make the grammatical structure more fluid and instead of two fragmented sentences you would have one grammatically correct one.--65.10.1.225 (talk) 16:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism warning
I left a warning here. It may not have been vandalism, but given this person's history it might have been. However, I never succeeded in getting the template you used to work. Thanks.Vchimpanzee· talk·contributions·21:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh no i'm not saying it requires re-assessment. However there are issues which were failed to be picked up on that's all. And as you carried out the review I thought I would inform you that I've cherrypicked them and placed on the nom's talk page for him/her to correct. It seems pointless ordering a reassessment when I know how hard the nom has worked on the article and you've alreayd spent the time reviewing it. All of the issues are fixable quite easily. There's just quite a few of them. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 04:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Anything else for the article besides the chart performance? The reception is light, but that's mostly because Kingston's album hasn't come out yet, and it's no telling when that will be. Candyo32 (talk) 04:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I "tagged the lead entirely" because none of the "lead" is sourced. Also, your poor grammar and spelling makes it difficult to understand what you are attempting to say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Machofantastic (talk • contribs) 06:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd rather not have an edit revert wars, so I'd like to as you, seeing as how you have a bit more experienced hand at editing than I do. The WP: MOSBIO page says that the first paragraph should contain the citizenship of the person on which the article was written. If you are born in France then you have a French citizenship and are therefore French-born (look at the French people article too). Let me know what you think. I meant no offense by my edit, I do apologize for any misunderstanding.
All I can see it says is that Devin Lazerine is the editor in chief. That's not the same as the publisher. Publishers are never people. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Not meaning to invade the convo, lol, but I was wondering about that when I added the name to the publisher on the MA article .Candyo32 16:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Sorry this is not about ownership Its just about spreading best practise. And in this case wherever Rap Up is used in any articles Derin Lazerine is not to be used as the publisher as there is no ascertainable evidence that this is the case. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
You have recently edited the Mars article to change the spelling of the planet's possessive case. The matter is now under discussion on the article's talk page. This is just a notice in case you are interested. --Fartherred (talk) 14:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Judging by the previous edit (which changed "retired professional wrestler" to "former professional wrestler"), I think the anon's objection was to the "retired" label. Given that it doesn't seem to be referenced, I think the removal should probably stand. —RuakhTALK20:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, probably a sock of that other guy, whoever he was. He's fresh off a block and picked up where he left off. I've turned him in (as I did yesterday), and I'm guessing they'll put him on ice permanently this time. I recommend leaving the article alone until he's blocked. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 21:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
If you look at the edit histories of the last three disruptive editors, this redirect is only one of many targets. It looks less like a 4chan attack (as I understand it) and more like a single roaming user. Protecting only one of the targets would not appear to do much good. -- Tom N (tcncv)talk/contrib01:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
It's not 4chan's MO (though it wouldn't be completely out of character for them). They're definitely spambots that have been programmed to post the same shit on hundreds of different articles (of course, several hundred of our most visited). You have to wonder- if someone has the time and skill to wrote a computer programme to do that, what do they gain from spamming Wikipedia? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Maybe because while a rollbacker catch them, revert them, warn them, report them and block them take at least 3 minutes. TbhotchTalkC.02:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
But protecting one article wouldn't help when they target hundreds with each attack. Besides, semi prot would be useless because the most recent spambot at least was autoconfirmed. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
But at least one article that wouldn't be vandalized, the only protection that could help is full-protection. It is a redirect, it hadn't been edited in years, so it could not be edited in another years, beside WP:RFUP exist. TbhotchTalkC.02:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
From the list of targets it appears that the bot is attacking Wikipedia's top referenced pages or some such list. This is only the the second of many on that list. Protecting the top 10 or 100 or 1000 will likely just deflect the bot's activity to other pages further down the list. I'll touch base with the edit filter folks to see if we can work on the problem from that direction. Other than that, the normal processes will catch them, block them, and revert their edits. Beyond that, it's not worth letting it get under our skin. -- Tom N (tcncv)talk/contrib02:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
The nomination was a bit premature as there are such existing faults in teh article in respect to content and MOS which can lead to its quick fail. I was going to quick fail it myself, but then I thought of better asking you. Reply on my talk page. --Legolas(talk2me)04:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi! May I ask you something? Since you uploaded the file could you please, if it is not too much trouble, reduce the time of the file to at most 21 seconds, per MoS music sample. Of course I would do it by myself but I don't know how to do it. Thank you. TbhotchTalkC.18:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind me posting under this section :P
I actually don't even remember how to do it, to be honest, and I don't have the programs to do it. That was over a year ago. I'll try to read up how to do it. Is it an immediate thing?
Also, under fair use, it could be allowed to stay. I remember a discussion— I can't remember where— and the author, who I believe was an admin or a bureaucrat, was saying that the 10% thing was just a rule of thumb. And he also said that if we can justify the use of a longer sample, it is permissible. For example, in the critical review section, one of the reviews commented on the expertise in the sound and her vocal styling, saying, "The vocal performance here possesses an elegantly gliding tone that perfectly maintains the tension in the lyric and arrangement. ... However, she tempers it with a stunning sense of control. Each time she climbs into agitation here it is almost as if she takes a quick breath then settles herself back to a slightly less tense state". If we move the sample down to critical section, or if we expand the caption in the sample box to include a comment like the above, we could make a case for it. What do you think? Orane(talk)02:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for considering it. The review that discusses her vocal nuances focused on the song's chorus "my guilty pleasure I ain't going nowhere, baby long as I'm here...", and that's what the sample highlights. All that needs to be done is for a little bit more to be added to the fair use rationale on the sample's description page. I'll add it when I get the chance, or feel free to add it. Orane(talk)06:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
52nd Grammy
Yeah, I kinda got snappy. I'm just so sick and tired of n00bs who dump everything into Trivia sections as if it were some sort of magical catch-all. I do have to say though, please don't template the regulars. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer)02:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your effort on this. I did the other seasons as there was no concensus via the show's talk page to make the change you reverted. If you are interested please don't hessitate to come visit at the talk page for the show Hasteur (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Ten Commandments
Odd that you didn't warn the other editors engaged in the edit war. Why is that?
The edit war has now moved on to deleting an NPOV tag. As vandalism, reverting that is not subject to 3RR. — kwami (talk) 18:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
ten commandments
Could you take a look at the recent pattern of edits to this article again? I believe kwama is edit warring. There is a clear consensus view that emerged over two weeks discussion with the involvement of many editors. The consensus is to reject kwame's edit. He now cries "censorship" and insists on posting a POV tag - all because after two weeks' discussion, no one agrees with him. Slrubenstein | Talk18:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Now you're outright lying? This is pathetic. There is no consensus, and it's not just me; two of us wish to maintain the previous consensus (which, BTW, was unanimous). SL presents this as "my edit", when it's a dab that has been in the lede of the article for two years. The version I am currently trying to restore may be my wording, but the wording is not important. Censorship is. There are numerous RS's stating the obvious, that the phrase "Ten Commandments" is applied to two texts, and in the opinion of two of us (and in the last actual consensus) is that, since the article only covers one of these, a mention of the other, with a link to that article, is appropriate for the lede. I fail to see how this could be controversial. — kwami (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Tip
You should probably use more edit summaries, especially in the mainspace. Btw, have you thought about archiving this page? It's getting rather long! Also btw, you should consider enabling email. Just random thought. You can completely ignore me if you want. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're talking about with "say it on my face". Since you posted at the other page, I assumed you would see my post, but if you didn't respond there I would have followed-up here. I have no idea what you are referring to when you say that I "should see all the stuff". In any event, I do not enjoy issuing ultimatums. I am just telling you that the rollbacks I posted diffs to were not reverts of patent vandalism, which is all rollback should be used for, and I will remove rollback privileges if it continues, but I'd much rather get you to understand why your use was not proper, so you we can both continue on our separate ways.
As I said to the other user in a different way: inappropriate edits ≠ vandalism, and the standard for rollback is patent vandalism, which means edits that are unquestionably intended to deface the encyclopedia. Among a legion of examples, patent vandalism does not include: possible test edits, opinion inserted in articles with or without sources, links that violate WP:EL or may be advertising or even copyvios unless a user continues after being informed of these issue; blog-like posts in articles, inappropriate tone, wrong information. etc. Now that we've talked about what patent vandalism is not, let's talk about what it is. Where vandalism is defined, as it is, as a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia, patent vandalism is where that deliberateness is sparklingly clear.
So let's go through the five edits I identified as improper rollbacks, carefully, without any hand waving.
First diff: The user added "not yet" to successor= in the infobox for Nintendo wii. There's nothing about this that evinces any clear intent to harm Wikipedia. In fact, it is a logical edit and it is correct. It's just not useful information. There is nothing about this edit from which you can determine the user's intent was to cause any harm. In fact, far from being patent vandalism, it looks like a good faith edit (the opposite of vandalism) that is just not appropriate. Rollback was absolutely inappropriate. Recommendation of the proper course: hand revert or undo with an appropriate edit summary such as "the successor field is for listing a successor when that happens; it is not helpful for the reader to be told no successor has happened yet". That's something I might leave but more terse would work to: "not appropriate"; "not useful info"; etc.
Second diff: User added "Her boyfriend is Pedro" to Gabourey Sidibe and self-reverted. The first edit was probably vandalism and it was definitely inappropriate without a source but once again, without being a mind reader it was not clearly a deliberate attempt to deface. For all you know, Ms. Sidibe is dating someone named Pedro. To make matters worse, this was a self-revert. The user left in a space, as you noted, but which had no affect whatsoever on the article's display.Recommendation of the proper course: Do nothing, but if you must, hand revert or undo with ES such as "this would need a reliable source to be cited in order to remain.".
Third diff: Link to poetry website added to Poetry. I don't think I really need to go into the same level of detail I have been This is not patent vandalism; there's no clear intent to deliberately harm Wikipedia; refer to WP:EL and don't use rollback.
Fourth diff: User added "{{kota besar di Indonesia|image=Jakarta Skyline (Resize).jpg}}" to Indonesia. Not only does this not appear to be patent vandalism, but it smacks of a good faith edit. It looks like some other language Wikipedia template, containing an image that is related to the article. AS tiny bit of sleuthing and voila, it was a good faith edit--The template exists, it just doesn't work here.
Fifth diff: User added "(deceased)" next to pre-existing Bernie Mac link in a section on notable residents of Frankfort, Illinois—that is true—and added two new names there, one of which is unknown, which tells you nothing since you don't know yourself, and the other the user added, Dennis DeYoungis from Frankfort, Illinois (I just checked). Another apparent good faith edit you rollbacked as if it was vandalism. That user has a vandal's name, and actually did go on to vandalize, and that makes it much more likely that the third name was totally improper. So, of course this edit needed to go, at least to remove the third, unknown name, but patent vandalism it was not. Right now, in the clear light of hindsight, you don't know it it was vandalism or not.
I've gone out of my way here to not act precipitously and take the time to discuss this matter. I hope I've made my point very clear and that you'll stop using rollback in this way. Kids scrawling fuck and making fart jokes, yes. But, as I said at the other user's page, if you can't answer the question, am I sure that the person's intent was to deface Wikipedia? with a clear "yes," it's not patent vandalism.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:42, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
The fifth revert is not excepted. Failing policies does not equal vandalism. I am not going to undo anything you've done now. As I thought I made clear, all of these edits were properly reverted, just not using rollback. I don't think they were made in bad faith by you. Just without a clear understanding of what constitutes patent vandalism. I would not have gone to any of this effort if I was going to take it away before impoper use continued'. I am telling you so that you can go forward using it properly so you can keep it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:40, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Per Connormah's comment at RFPP, I've replaced PC1 with indefinite semi protection, which obviously has the added side-effect of prventing moves by non-autoconfirmed editors. Is that sufficient, or were you hoping for full move-protection? If so, could you elaborate as to why that would be necessary? TFOWR10:11, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
No Jokes
Krishnadas Kaviraja Goswami described in Chaitanya-charitamrita Adi 6.38:
‘chaitanya-mangala’ shune yadi pashandi, yavana
seha maha-vaishnava haya tatakshana
If even a great atheist hears Shri Chaitanya-mangala (previous name for Shri Chaitanya-bhagavata), he immediately becomes a great devotee.
So all the great atheists which comprise of 99.99% of the world’s population can become maha-vaishnavas if they get the supreme good fortune of reading this book. Thus in my personal opinion, when this book is published and distributed in mass quantities all over the world, it will break open the gates of the flood of the love of Godhead brought by Lord Chaitanya and His associates and will hasten the advent of the predicted Golden Age in all its glory.
Sun is related with sunday. It is not a joke. If you think there is no life on sun, you are in illusion. Sun is ruled by sun-demigod. So in article about sun must be mentioning of Sun-Day as well. Same - Moon and moon-demigod - for mo(o)n-day and all other days of week. It is very serious to know the Absolute Truth, and if we are not, and think in impersonal terms like - Sun is not Person, thus we commit spiritual suicide and that is very sad... ;-( So, let it be. I mean this is not a joke. See here, for example:
[10]—Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.91.58 (talk) 20:52, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
But the thing is that space and time are interrelated, so if we speak about Sun - we must also think about Sun-demigod. So there is no question about Sun without knowing the best time when Sun is most active - Sunday. At present, article about Sun is very unscientific, as it do not include mentioning about Sun-day (well, just once mentioned). But no mention even about Sun-demigod. So, it is to be expanded. And those boxes also help one to read encyclopedia - from one article one goes to another - related.
And actually also numbers about Sun must be there:
"The distance from the sun to the earth is lower planetary systems called Atala, Vitala, Sutala, Talatala, Mahatala, Rasatala and Patala."
"Between Bhuvarloka and Bhurloka is antariksa, an interplanetary space where the Sun is situated. Here live beings like Raksasas, Yaksas, Pisacas and ghosts. They often descend on earth and are generally inimical to humans. Usuallly they will be born later as humans."
"Yamaraja - "The King of the pitas [ancestors] is Yamaraja, the very powerful son of the sun-god. He resides in Pitrloka with his personal assistants and, while abiding by the rules and regulations set down by the Supreme Lord, has his agents, the Yamadutas, bring all the sinful men to him immediately upon their death."
"While Maha-Visnu sleeps within the Causal Ocean, innumerable universes are generated along with His breathing. These universes are floating, and they are scattered all over the Causal Ocean. They stay only during the breathing period of Maha-Visnu. In each and every universal globe, the same Maha-Visnu enters again as Garbhodakasayi Visnu and lies there on the serpentlike Sesa incarnation. From His navel sprouts a lotus stem, and on the lotus, Brahma, the lord of the universe, is born. Brahma creates all forms of living beings of different shapes in terms of different desires within the universe. He also creates the sun, moon and other demigods. (SB 2.5.33 p.)"
"1 yojan = 8 miles = 12,8 km
Dhruvaloka, the polestar, is 3,800,000 yojanas above the sun. Above Dhruvaloka by 10,000,000 yojanas is Maharloka, above Maharloka by 20,000,000 yojanas is Janaloka, above Janaloka by 80,000,000 yojanas is Tapoloka, and above Tapoloka by 120,000,000 yojanas is Satyaloka. Thus the distance from the sun to Satyaloka is 233,800,000 yojanas, or 1,870,400,000 miles. The Vaikuntha planets begin 26,200,000 yojanas (209,600,000 miles) above Satyaloka. Thus the Visnu Purana describes that the covering of the universe is 260,000,000 yojanas (2,080,000,000 miles) away from thesun. (SB 5.23.9 p.)"
"The moon is situated 100,000 yojanas above the rays of the sunshine. Day and night on the heavenly planets and Pitrloka are calculated according to its waning and waxing. Above the moon by a distance of 200,000 yojanas are some stars, and above these stars is Sukra-graha (Venus), whose influence is always auspicious for the inhabitants of the entire universe. Above Sukra-graha by 200,000 yojanas is Budha-graha (Mercury), whose influence is sometimes auspicious and sometimes inauspicious. Next, above Budha-graha by 200,000 yojanas, is Angaraka (Mars), which almost always has an unfavorable influence. Above Angaraka by another 200,000 yojanas is the planet called Brhaspati-graha (Jupiter), which is always very favorable for qualified brahmanas. Above Brhaspati-graha is the planet Sanaiscara (Saturn), which is very inauspicious, and above Saturn is a group of seven stars occupied by great saintly persons who are always thinking of the welfare of the entire universe. These seven stars circumambulate Dhruvaloka, which is the residence of Lord Visnu within this universe. (SB 5.22)"
"Neither the demigods controlling fire, the sun, the moon and the stars nor those in charge of earth, water, ether, air, speech and mind actually remove the sins of their worshipers, who continue to see in terms of dualities. But wise sages destroy one's sins when respectfully served for even a few moments. (SB 10.84.12)"
"Rahu is situated 10,000 yojanas below the sun. Below Rahu by another 10,000 yojanas are the planets of the Siddhas, Caranas and Vidyadharas, and below these are planets such as Yaksaloka and Raksaloka. Below these planets is the earth, and 70,000 yojanas below the earth are the lower planetary systems Bila-svarga: Atala, Vitala, Sutala, Talatala, Mahatala, Rasatala and Patala. Demons and Raksasas live in these lower planetary systems with their wives and children, always engaged in sense gratification and not fearing their next births. The sunshine does not reach these planets, but they are illuminated by jewels fixed upon the hoods of snakes. Because of these shining gems there is practically no darkness. Those living in these planets do not become old or diseased, and they are not afraid of death from any cause but the time factor, the Supreme Personality of Godhead."
"The distance from the sun to the earth is lower planetary systems called Atala, Vitala, Sutala, Talatala, Mahatala, Rasatala and Patala. Below these lower planets by 30,000 yojanas, Sesa Naga is lying on the Garbhodaka Ocean. That ocean is 249,800,000 yojanas deep. Thus the total diameter of the universe is approximately 500,000,000 yojanas, or 4,000,000,000 miles."
"MOON-THING
The following questions and answers are taken from "Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy" by Dr. Richard L. Thompson (SadApUta dasa) which was published in 1989 by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (used with permission). SadApUta dasa is a founding member of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, the scientific branch of ISKCON.
[From Chapter Eight - Questions and Answers]
Q: Using radar and lasers, scientists have recently obtained very accurate estimates of the earth-moon distance. This distance is about 238,000 miles. How do you reconcile this with Vedic calculations?
A: According to sUrya-siddhAnta [see footnote], the distance from the earth globe to the moon is about 258,000 miles. This is in reasonable agreement with the modern value.
Q: The Vedic literature says that the moon is higher than the sun. How can this be?
A: In Chapter 22 of the Fifth Canto, the heights of the planets above the earth are given, and it is stated that the moon is 100,000 yojanas above the rays of the sun. In this chapter, the word "above" means "above the plane of BhU-maNDala". It does not refer to distance measured radially from the surface of the earth globe. In Section 4.b we show that if the plane of BhU-maNDala corresponds to the plane of the ecliptic, then it indeed makes sense to say that the moon is higher than the sun relative to BhU-maNDala. This does not mean that the moon is farther from the earth globe than the sun.
For example, if point A is in a plane, B is 1,000 miles above the plane, and C is 2,000 miles above the plane, we cannot necessarily conclude that C is further from A than B is.
Footnote: Several times in the Caitanya-caritAmRta, Srila Prabhupada refers to the sUrya-siddhAnta which was spoken by a messenger from the sun-god, sUrya, at the end of the last Satya-yuga. It was translated into Bengali by Srila BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI. In the Caitanya-caritAmRta (Adi 1.3.8p), Prabhupada writes:
These calculations are given in the authentic astronomy book known as the sUrya-siddhAnta. This book was compiled by the great professor of astronomy and mathematics Bimal Prasad Datta, later known as BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI GosvAmi, who was our merciful spiritual master. He was honored with the title SiddhAnta SarasvatI for writing sUrya-siddhAnta, and the title GosvAmi MahArAja was added when he accepted sannyAsa, the renounced order of life." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.91.58 (talk) 21:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[12]—Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.91.58 (talk) 21:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
This doesn't matter: if you say about Sun - it is same Sun in any language, culture etc. So if we speak about Sun, we also should keep in mind that it is not free from life. And we must take into account time. We have calendars and moon influence our health and so many other things. So moon is important. And sun is also important. But they are all persons, but now article about Sun misses this. All seven days of week are ruled by different demigods. But of course they are subordinate to Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krishna. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.91.58 (talk) 21:20, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
"In this chapter the orbits of the planets are described. According to the movements of the moon and other planets, all the inhabitants of the universe are prone to auspicious and inauspicious situations. This is referred to as the influence of the stars.
The sun-god, who controls the affairs of the entire universe, especially in regard to heat, light, seasonal changes and so on, is considered an expansion of Nārāyana. He represents the three Vedas — Rig, Yajur and Sāma — and therefore he is known as Trayīmaya, the form of Lord Nārāyana. Sometimes the sun-god is also called Sūrya Nārāyana. The sun-god has expanded himself in twelve divisions, and thus he controls the six seasonal changes and causes winter, summer, rain and so on. Yogīs and karmīs following the varnāśrama institution, who practice hatha or ashtāńga-yoga or who perform agnihotra sacrifices, worship Sūrya Nārāyana for their own benefit. The demigod Sūrya is always in touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyana. Residing in outer space, which is in the middle of the universe, between Bhūloka and Bhuvarloka, the sun rotates through the time circle of the zodiac, represented by twelve rāśis, or signs, and assumes different names according to the sign he is in. For the moon, every month is divided into two fortnights. Similarly, according to solar calculations, a month is equal to the time the sun spends in one constellation; two months constitute one season, and there are twelve months in a year. The entire area of the sky is divided into two halves, each representing an ayana, the course traversed by the sun within a period of six months. The sun travels sometimes slowly, sometimes swiftly and sometimes at a moderate speed. In this way it travels within the three worlds, consisting of the heavenly planets, the earthly planets and outer space. These orbits are referred to by great learned scholars by the names Samvatsara, Parivatsara, Idāvatsara, Anuvatsara and Vatsara.
The moon is situated 100,000 yojanas above the rays of the sunshine. Day and night on the heavenly planets and Pitriloka are calculated according to its waning and waxing. Above the moon by a distance of 200,000 yojanas are some stars, and above these stars is Śukra-graha (Venus), whose influence is always auspicious for the inhabitants of the entire universe. Above Śukra-graha by 200,000 yojanas is Budha-graha (Mercury), whose influence is sometimes auspicious and sometimes inauspicious. Next, above Budha-graha by 200,000 yojanas, is Ańgāraka (Mars), which almost always has an unfavorable influence. Above Ańgāraka by another 200,000 yojanas is the planet called Brihaspati-graha (Jupiter), which is always very favorable for qualified brāhmanas. Above Brihaspati-graha is the planet Śanaiścara (Saturn), which is very inauspicious, and above Saturn is a group of seven stars occupied by great saintly persons who are always thinking of the welfare of the entire universe. These seven stars circumambulate Dhruvaloka, which is the residence of Lord Vishnu within this universe."[13]
King Parīkshit inquired from Śukadeva Gosvāmī: My dear lord, you have already affirmed the truth that the supremely powerful sun-god travels around Dhruvaloka with both Dhruvaloka and Mount Sumeru on his right. Yet at the same time the sun-god faces the signs of the zodiac and keeps Sumeru and Dhruvaloka on his left. How can we reasonably accept that the sun-god proceeds with Sumeru and Dhruvaloka on both his left and right simultaneously?
Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī clearly answered: When a potter's wheel is moving and small ants located on that big wheel are moving with it, one can see that their motion is different from that of the wheel because they appear sometimes on one part of the wheel and sometimes on another. Similarly, the signs and constellations, with Sumeru and Dhruvaloka on their right, move with the wheel of time, and the antlike sun and other planets move with them. The sun and planets, however, are seen in different signs and constellations at different times. This indicates that their motion is different from that of the zodiac and the wheel of time itself.
The original cause of the cosmic manifestation is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyana. When great saintly persons, fully aware of the Vedic knowledge, offered prayers to the Supreme Person, He descended to this material world in the form of the sun to benefit all the planets and purify fruitive activities. He divided Himself into twelve parts and created seasonal forms, beginning with spring. In this way He created the seasonal qualities, such as heat, cold and so on.[14]
According to the system of four varnas and four āśramas, people generally worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyana, who is situated as the sun-god. With great faith they worship the Supreme Personality as the Supersoul according to ritualistic ceremonies handed down in the three Vedas, such as agnihotra and similar higher and lower fruitive acts, and according to the process of mystic yoga. In this way they very easily attain the ultimate goal of life.[15]
This is definitely nonsense to think that Sun is just lifeless mass of matter.
Read this - this is very useful to know if you care about "SUN" article's usefulness:
SB 5.22.5: The sun-god, who is Nārāyana, or Vishnu, the soul of all the worlds, is situated in outer space between the upper and lower portions of the universe. Passing through twelve months on the wheel of time, the sun comes in touch with twelve different signs of the zodiac and assumes twelve different names according to those signs. The aggregate of those twelve months is called a samvatsara, or an entire year. According to lunar calculations, two fortnights — one of the waxing moon and the other of the waning — form one month. That same period is one day and night for the planet Pitriloka. According to stellar calculations, a month equals two and one quarter constellations. When the sun travels for two months, a season passes, and therefore the seasonal changes are considered parts of the body of the year.
SB 5.22.6: Thus the time the sun takes to rotate through half of outer space is called an ayana, or its period of movement [in the north or in the south].
SB 5.22.7: The sun-god has three speeds — slow, fast and moderate. The time he takes to travel entirely around the spheres of heaven, earth and space at these three speeds is referred to, by learned scholars, by the five names Samvatsara, Parivatsara, Idāvatsara, Anuvatsara and Vatsara.
SB 5.22.8: Above the rays of the sunshine by a distance of 100,000 yojanas [800,000 miles] is the moon, which travels at a speed faster than that of the sun. In two lunar fortnights the moon travels through the equivalent of a samvatsara of the sun, in two and a quarter days it passes through a month of the sun, and in one day it passes through a fortnight of the sun.
SB 5.22.9: When the moon is waxing, the illuminating portions of it increase daily, thus creating day for the demigods and night for the pitās. When the moon is waning, however, it causes night for the demigods and day for the pitās. In this way the moon passes through each constellation of stars in thirty muhūrtas [an entire day]. The moon is the source of nectarean coolness that influences the growth of food grains, and therefore the moon-god is considered the life of all living entities. He is consequently called Jīva, the chief living being within the universe.
SB 5.22.10: Because the moon is full of all potentialities, it represents the influence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The moon is the predominating deity of everyone's mind, and therefore the moon-god is called Manomaya. He is also called Annamaya because he gives potency to all herbs and plants, and he is called Amritamaya because he is the source of life for all living entities. The moon pleases the demigods, pitās, human beings, animals, birds, reptiles, trees, plants and all other living entities. Everyone is satisfied by the presence of the moon. Therefore the moon is also called Sarvamaya [all-pervading].
SB 5.22.11: There are many stars located 200,000 yojanas [1,600,000 miles] above the moon. By the supreme will of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they are fixed to the wheel of time, and thus they rotate with Mount Sumeru on their right, their motion being different from that of the sun. There are twenty-eight important stars, headed by Abhijit.
SB 5.22.12: Some 1,600,000 miles above this group of stars is the planet Venus, which moves at almost exactly the same pace as the sun according to swift, slow and moderate movements. Sometimes Venus moves behind the sun, sometimes in front of the sun and sometimes along with it. Venus nullifies the influence of planets that are obstacles to rainfall. Consequently its presence causes rainfall, and it is therefore considered very favorable for all living beings within this universe. This has been accepted by learned scholars.
SB 5.22.13: Mercury is described to be similar to Venus, in that it moves sometimes behind the sun, sometimes in front of the sun and sometimes along with it. It is 1,600,000 miles above Venus, or 7,200,000 miles above earth. Mercury, which is the son of the moon, is almost always very auspicious for the inhabitants of the universe, but when it does not move along with the sun, it forbodes cyclones, dust, irregular rainfall, and waterless clouds. In this way it creates fearful conditions due to inadequate or excessive rainfall.
SB 5.22.14: Situated 1,600,000 miles above Mercury, or 8,800,000 miles above earth, is the planet Mars. If this planet does not travel in a crooked way, it crosses through each sign of the zodiac in three fortnights and in this way travels through all twelve, one after another. It almost always creates unfavorable conditions in respect to rainfall and other influences.
SB 5.22.15: Situated 1,600,000 miles above Mars, or 10,400,000 miles above earth, is the planet Jupiter, which travels through one sign of the zodiac within the period of a Parivatsara. If its movement is not curved, the planet Jupiter is very favorable to the brāhmanas of the universe.
SB 5.22.16: Situated 1,600,000 miles above Jupiter, or 12,000,000 miles above earth, is the planet Saturn, which passes through one sign of the zodiac in thirty months and covers the entire zodiac circle in thirty Anuvatsaras. This planet is always very inauspicious for the universal situation.
SB 5.22.17: Situated 8,800,000 miles above Saturn, or 20,800,000 miles above earth, are the seven saintly sages, who are always thinking of the well-being of the inhabitants of the universe. They circumambulate the supreme abode of Lord Vishnu, known as Dhruvaloka, the polestar.[16]
This is useful to know not only about Sun, but about other planets as well - they are also living beings, they are all inhabited. All planets are inhabited - both in spiritual and in material world (when it is manifested). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.91.58 (talk) 21:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
"according to the Vedic version, the modern astronomer's proposition that the moon is nearest to the earth should not be accepted. The chronological order in which people all over the world refer to the days of the week — Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday — corresponds to the Vedic order of the planets and thus circumstantiates the Vedic version. Apart from this, when the Lord appeared the planets and stars became situated very auspiciously, according to astrological calculations, to celebrate the birth of the Lord."
No, Legolas is now clearly guilty of it. This needs to stop and I don't want either of you in trouble. You're my fellow editors and this really isn't about all that much. DinDraithou (talk) 05:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Status icon
I was wondering on how you get the status icon on top of your page. You have an icon that says "Status:Online/Offline" on top of your user page and talk page. I was wondering how to get that icon on my page. ♥ SweetfornowTalkContribs17:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
No se si me parece conveniente poner información antes de que sea confirmado por Gaga o Interscope. Al menos si es regional, porque que tenga airplay, ¿significa que es sencillo? --Trivia harrypotter (talk) 07:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
De acuerdo. Cambiando de tema 2 cosas te voy a decir: 1)la referencia en the fame monster sobre el lanzamiento en Brasil/Brazil es falsa ya que no indica la fecha. 2)La referencia del lanzamiento el 20 de abril de 2010 de "alejandro" en las radios ya no aparece, ya que la página ha sido actualizada. Yo no entiendo nada de la wiki en inglés, así que si puedes fíjate y corrige los errores. Gracias, no te molesto más.--Trivia harrypotter (talk) 07:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Tbhotch. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
