User talk:Xophorus

Welcome...

Hello, Xophorus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Lame Name (talk) 13:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}

I have ACCIDENTALLY erased part (or all - I'm not sure I correctly remembered as much of the title as I then provided) of the title of the Carl Jung reference at Don Juanism If there is anybody who knows how I may undo this accident, I would appreciate it the help. I wrote to the Jung homepage but they haven't yet replied and I'm not sure they will be able to help. The Broughton book does not have an index entry for "undelete."bXophorus (talk) 18:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After getting into trouble with the non-musicians at the Frank Zappa site, I have decided to restrict my activities to "Orphans" and similar articles where I can do less damage... until I learn my way around better.

Just go to the article, click 'history'. You'll see a list of all the edits to the page. If 'undo' appears next to the edit where you removed the information, click it and hit save. If it doesn't appear, it means someone has already fixed it. Cheers. [roux » x] 18:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zappa article

Hi Xophorus,

I fear your additions to the Frank Zappa article will be reverted again. Zappa was never a particularly notable orchestral conductor and your additions to the article do not provide any references to support their inclusion. Wikipedia requires that information added to articles be verifiable. As the Zappa article is a Featured Article additions need to meet the standard required to become an FA.

I think a better place for your addition would be in the Edgard Varèse article which mentions Zappa's championing of the composer. But it will need references to support it.

Please discuss this on the Zappa talk page if you feel that it really does need to be added to the article.

Thanks Lame Name (talk) 13:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Zappa

Please do not add material sources by blogs and other sources that are not reliable. Please discuss any additions on Talk:Frank Zappa first. This is a Featured article, so it is very important that you do this. Thanks, —Mattisse (Talk) 22:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Frank Zappa. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. The Real Libs-speak politely 22:56, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Zappa article

Hi. Everybody can contribute to Wikipedia, but I suggest you take a little time to read about some of the basics as described in the welcome message on the top of your talk page. You are inserting unverified information into an article, which is not allowed according to Wikipedia policies. Even is your paragraph was references, I would argue that it foes not contribute much to the Frank Zappa article. The paragraph describes in much detail a very minor event in Zappa's career. Moreover, nobody is trying to "war" against you (as you claim in your edit summary here where you falsly, as I can see, claim that you are being deleted at talk pages). We all try to obtain the best results. In that process concensus is important (see WP:CONSENSUS), and clearly there is not consensus for including your edit. Sometimes editors just have to accept that—one should never take it personally. --HJensen, talk 23:05, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept a welcome

Hello, Xophorus! 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! Addbot (talk) 12:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Sometimes it is difficult getting used to Wikipedia. Perhaps this information will help. —Mattisse (Talk) 23:10, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR violation

I have reported you for violation of the 3RR rule. Sorry, but I had no choice.--HJensen, talk 23:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Frank Zappa. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 23:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hi.. if you tell me exactly what you want to edit, I can go do it, and then can give you a link to see the 'diff' (difference) between the two pages, so you can see what needs to be edited where. [roux » x] 03:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt Me

WP:PORNBIO

As a member of WikiProject Pornography, I'm just letting you know there's currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pornography about changing the WP:PORNBIO criteria. Your opinions would be appreciated. Thanks. Epbr123 (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When responding to a person's post in the discussion, please don't splice another user's post with your comments. If you have to address another user's post point-by-point, just quote the point briefly and respond to that quote. It makes the discussion easier to read and to attribute to the correct author. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've removed your text where you've splice another user's post, in order to help others follow the conversation easier. Feel free to re-add your comments underneath the other persons post. Epbr123 (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Greetings Xophorus, I see you're up for adoption, and I'm in the market. If you're still interested, feel free to drop me a line anytime. If you no longer wish to be adopted, please remove the adoptee's userbox from your userpage.

Furthermore, I see you've become passionately attached to several articles/discussions. This can bode well for your future dedication to the Wikipedia project, so be bold but civil and it will work out. Let me know if I can help you in any way. - Draeco (talk) 02:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, talk proceeds downward. You are indeed the most inclusionist voice in the PORNBIO discussion, but that's par for the course. Pornography is one of those controversial topics that draws debate, and in my experience deletionists are more likely to legislate and argue. Wikipedia's method of concensus theoretically works out in the long run, but in the short run it's sometimes a battle of who shouts the loudest/longest. Maybe it's destined to be a neverending cycle of the latter. Try to keep your argument succinct and objective and it's more likely to be heard. Your argument tugs at my heart, so I'll put in my two cents as well. As for Frank Zappa, I can understand some editors being protective of it as a Featured Article. If you can find a print citation of his orchestra pursuits that's basically ironclad. - Draeco (talk) 04:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Succinctness would also have the advantage of wasting less of my time... Here is something for you: I don't understand this letter I got from admin. What is this about? I gather it has to do with Talk.

The Meta page User talk:Xophorus has been created on 08:06, 21 November 2008 by

Mikhailov Kusserow, see

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xophorus for the current

version.

This is a new page.

Editor's summary: Welcome!

Contact the editor:

mail:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Mikhailov_Kusserow

wiki: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mikhailov_Kusserow

1) There are several ways to identify yourself as an inclusionist, including joining the AIW with the {{inclusionist}} tag on your userpage, or the {{user incl}} userbox. There is no active community though, it's just a way to define yourself.

2) Conversations between users are choppy, generally you respond on the other user's talk page so they will receive notification. For me to have noticed your question above, for instance, I would have to add your page to my watch list, but that would mean I was bugged every time anybody wrote anything here.

3) Concerning said question, it's just a notification. Technically, that user "created" your talk page when he made a first edit to welcome you to Wikimedia. Because this was a subpage connected to your account, you were notified. - Draeco (talk) 01:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Porn Awards

of interest? Power.corrupts (talk) 16:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to roll back the too bold change - comments? Power.corrupts (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]