![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Hi I noticed your various warnings at Can't sleep, clown will eat me ( talk · contribs) and made a note there. The redirect was actually created by Sjorford ( talk · contribs) [ here]. I have refrained from leaving a note on his account though as he has been inactive for quite a while himself. Agathoclea ( talk) 11:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
A few days ago, you removed the scenarios for teams to advance in the Asian Cup article. Your edit summary said there had been consensus against scenarios in a recent discussion at WP:FOOTY. I did find one discussion on the topic here; is this the one you referred to? If so, I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that there was consensus against listing the scenarios. It seems to me that no consensus was reached, but the discussion was evenly split (in fact, about 5 of the last 6 comments were in favor of keeping them at least in some form). If there's another discussion (that reached a different conclusion) that I just didn't find, please tell me where it is. Thanks! LarryJeff ( talk) 23:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Just a note to say that your presence at Special education would be particularly welcome, as it's sometimes hard to find people who know anything at all about this subject. Actually, the education-related articles are among the worst on Wikipedia, so let me encourage you to pick out any subject that interests you. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 02:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Heh :) Will have a look. Cheers, 狐 FOX 19:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Um, not to play "Gotcha!" or anything, but Štybar's contract with Quick Step begins on March 1. Isn't updating his and team articles now exactly what you have frequently chided others (including me) not to do in the post-Tour transfer frenzy every year? How is a contract signed in August which takes effect in January any different from one signed in January which takes effect in March?
Sorry if this sounds confrontational, it's truly not meant that way. Green-eyed girl ( Talk · Contribs) 08:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
The discussion about "Twin people" is underway, once a consensus is reached i will undoubtedly respect it.
Regarding the title of my message, some summary discussion: and they call me the aggressive obnoxious one at the site...Excuse my "poor" English, i am Portuguese, i really thought "to groom" was used in the football world to mention someone who was brought up in a given team's youth system. If it's not well you learn every day, you did not have to make fun...
Regarding the DEFAULTSORT, well i have seen several discussions going both ways, so no consensus there either. Attentively, from Portugal - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 00:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
...for the banter. It seems rather poor form to delete another user's talkpage comments nevertheless. Careful With That Axe, Eugene Hello... 08:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your edit and I disagree with it. Why should a player that isn't part of the 24 players that were officially called up, be added? Regards -- Bocafan76 ( talk) 19:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I was hoping you could give me your opinion on this as you seem to be one of the few who have edited any of these articles and is still active. Also you seem to have a considered view on most subjects! Thanks Stu.W UK ( talk) 11:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm happy for the PROD to be removed on that basis, if you want. Although the last time I argued for an article to be kept on the basis of notability in Irish football (scoring in a Champions League qualifier among other things), it was still deleted. — W F C— 10:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Discussion here that you might be interested in: -- Eamonnca1 ( talk) 22:44, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I'd be interested to see the evidence on which you posted this editorial gloss in ITN: This is correct in Irish English; please do not change it to "wins". Your note is contrary to the practice of the Irish media. Kevin McE ( talk) 17:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kev, thanks for the catch on the Thoroughbred article going to main page tomorrow. (Isn't there normally a way that the most active editors get a heads up on this sooner than 24 hours and by chance??) Anyway, I noticed that the summary not only had the mortality bit that is of dubious sourcing, but the way they shortened it down kind of sucks in general. ("The Thoroughbred is a horse breed best known for its use in horse racing. Considered a "hot-blooded" horse, ") Is there ANY way that a new edit can be proposed before this hits prime time? Montanabw (talk) 21:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello there. You say you were a Priest for 21 years; are you still one or did you leave? I'm very curious. 98.176.12.43 ( talk) 05:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
This is the proof that it is professional, http://www.pfai.ie — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRPRO03 ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Why bother having information on the league or clubs in Ireland, if the players are not included. If the players are have to play in a 'fully professional' game, then the league and clubs are not 'fully professional' and therefore should not be on site either. There is countless articles on players that play in non professional leagues and yet, these pages are not told to be removed, just pedantic to be honest.
For instance, the Scottish Football League is not a professional league and their is many examples there of players that did not play in SPL and they have their own pages without any problems. Exactly same thing as Ireland but treated differently and thats only 1 league !!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRPRO03 ( talk • contribs) 00:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
You can consider this a first and final warning for edit warring. Not that it was necessary, but I've removed all wording that anybody could possibly interpret as a wish to compare the two things as if they were remotely comparable. As for nobody wishing it, why exactly do you think Platini was asked to comment on it? Nobody had challenged that information for months on that basis, and certainly haven't felt they had the right to edit war over it. If you think you do have that right, then you'll be explaining it at the AN3 board next time. I'm frankly sick to my back teeth with certain WP:FOOTY members, who seem to think this is remotely acceptable behaviour, as if you've never heard of BRD in you lives. MickMacNee ( talk) 21:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I personally do not do that unless I know that the main editor is not active ( 1, 2). It is unfair to notify the FAC nominator(s) or persons mentioned on it instead to the article. Also, that day I was not active and that's why I didn't even tried to notify main editors. Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 22:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
You keep reverting back to an unsourced and even more arbitrary OR table. At least the "OR" table I put in place has some basis. The ranking numbers used as the default sort in the version of the table prior to my edit are meaningless. I spent several hours trying to come up with any model that explained them.
I don't think that creating a table based on exactly the same accepted model, which is sourced, for the World Cup is original research. However, if you can not agree to my table then I propose that the the meaningless rank column and the default ordering be alphabetical by Team name or largest to smallest based on wins. Marcaudy ( talk) 20:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Your observation on the Main page discussion is, in my opinion, correct. According to my copy of the Oxford dictionary the correct spelling is as above. It further states the melee is the accepted American spelling. Keep up the good work!! Denisarona ( talk) 14:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
plz check:
England's Coaching staff,
Germany's,
Australia's,
Spain's,
Scotland's,
South Korea's and etc...
Shahin (
talk)
20:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Please
Also, even you know that your explanation was completely wrong, as even Laurent Gbagbo was not convicted yet on the front page, so stop giving unreasonable explanations. Also before pointing a finger on me and telling me to read newspapers time to time, I expect you to read the front page time to time so that you know that our usual trigger for court proceedings is conviction. To have arrest, arraignment, opening of case, conviction is overkill. This is not an arrest after a long hunt for someone who has been on the run for many years: his whereabouts for the last few months has been a matter of public record, and an arrest could have been affected at any time. Remember pointing one finger at others points three back to you.
JustinSpringer ( talk) 18:41, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi there KEVIN, VASCO from Portugal here,
again, i fail to understand your feelings towards me, really, this judging by your last WP:FOOTY comments (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#More_football_vandals_than_User:Zombie433.2C_you_know...). I only wanted you folks to be on your toes, given this is about football vandals, so that you would know how to operate when coming across these "users"' "contributions"; in other words, i WANTED TO HELP THE PROJECT.
Your reaction (again, my title was a bit over the top i admit it, but i did not insult anyone): "yes we know, we are not like you, hiding behind your summaries, we play by the book". Again i remind you (don't know if i have discussed this with you, i might have) i am not proficient at all in WP technicalities, and the few times i have "tried" ANI or akin, i have come out empty. I prefer the "community" outreach much better. Also, i am fully aware of the fact that i am not posting my queries in the correct fields, but i have longsince (almost five years here now) learned that vandals can be blocked, that does not stop them the least.
I have just recently been blocked for disruptive summaries (24hrs, highly deserved in the light of WP guidelines), but that won't change my utter despise for the vandals lurking, no siree. Wished the well-intended users such as yourself would think better of me regarding this, feel bad to see you don't...
Attentively, from Portugal - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 19:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Nice :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 19:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I just don't understand your latest contribution to that thread. What is it that you believe either does or does not make consistent sense? Kevin McE ( talk) 17:47, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, small linguistic point. "Stands on the River Nene" doesn't capture the full meaning of "stands athwart the River Nene". "Athwart" here means the city is on both sides of the river. Cf. Hull, which stands on the River Humber but not athwart it, as all the city is on the north bank of the river. One could instead say "astride" but that sounds to me a bit anthropomorphic. Incidentally, the latest Concise Oxford Dictionary doesn't think "athwart" is archaic. -- Alarics ( talk) 12:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I do not see other Belgian cyclists in both Category:Belgian Vuelta a España stage winners and parent Category:Vuelta a España stage winners. Can you explain Your edit? -- Gumruch ( talk) 17:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry that it went that way. I was hesitant to remove/change the hook because the fact was not unreasonable - that jungle is vast, and there are simply not many other left in Mexico, and that is the only place in N America where jaguar is currently found. Its range is constantly and rapidly shrinking, thus many data are simply obsolete - jaguar does need untouched, large free forests. Your other hooks were reasonable, but not easily verifiable (Ah, and my revert on reference in Lacandon Jungle was due to my stupid mistake in referencing naming - ref. was valid, but got masked, fixed that). Cheers. Materialscientist ( talk) 10:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments at Wikipedia talk:Did you know, but I wanted to let you know that you can actually suggest changes to hooks before they enter the Queues and Prep Areas at Template talk:Did you know. Thanks again for your comments. OCNative ( talk) 02:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the review, I have changes the definite article in both DYKs. Can you re-ok the DYKs. Thanks.-- CrossTempleJay → talk 20:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kevin, I finally tracked you down (you forgot to sign your comments at the DYK). I have replied to your concerns there. Would it be possible for you to give me some feedback? Crisco 1492 ( talk) 14:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
If I may, how is an inclined plane that carries vehicles not a vehicular inclined plane? The Johnstown Inclined Plane's website [1] infers the same thing as in the article (carring vehicles makes it a vehicular inclined plane). Though if that is not the correct definition, what is the definition of a "vehicular inclined plane"? Niagara Don't give up the ship 01:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi. When commenting back on the footy discussion, could you please follow the regular/normal indent procedures? You inserted comments ahead of mine and it may appear to the casual reader that I am responding to you when I am not. I'd appreciate it. Thank you. Oh, and I too could represent either Ireland or the US, but I also doubt I'll get called up to either national squad at any point soon. ;) Erikeltic ( Talk) 14:33, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Constructive criticism is sometimes necessary but I've encountered an unusually high number of critical comments at DYK from you of late to the point it is verging on being disruptive and impeding progress. Some of your comments are enough to make some editors not bother from contributing to DYK and contribute so this persistent opposition has got to stop. Its almost as if you are being paid to criticise the articles people are nominating. As the saying says "if you got nothing nice to say, say nothing at all". Please try to dial down the comments and try to focus on something which doesn't seem to intentionally belittle the work and efforts of others.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
As I say, constructive criticism is good, especially if you identify major prose issues , typo, plagiarism, and other issues. I haven't seen you be "rude" as such but I've got the impression from several of your posts that you are nitpicking over certain issues and making minor flaws into something more substantial than they really are. See my talk page, multiple comments of yours have come across to many as snotty. For instance if an editor makes several efforts to correct issues you identify and still its not good enough then the likelihood is that they'll become exasperated. There are several regular contributors who are not happy with the way you are going from DYK nom to nom picking holes in them. I suggest you try to find a balance, to offer improvement suggestions but try to not to seem like you are issuing ultimatums and intentionally putting down people's work. While DYKs do need to be of basic quality and structure, they don't have to be of particularly quality you'd expect from GAs or higher.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:09, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Kevin, I've had several people mention your name in emails I've received as posing a new threat to DYK progression and causing a stink. You don't just silently go about fixing errors and minor edits like somebody like Material Scientist does, you make a big song and dance about it at DYK and make patronising or bitchy comments about people's work or choice of subject matter. There is a difference. If you continue with the snide comments then it is only a matter of time before others take action and open up an RFC on you as the amount of examples of your critical comments in relation to your approvals are alarming. Its almost as if you are here solely to pass judgements on the work of others and prevent them from reaching the main page. I suggest you spend less time with the criticism and do more article work, or at least address minor errors yourself without complaining about them. You objecting to every DYK hook is not going to dramatically improve the quality or change anything. If you are too persistent the likelihhood is that some editors with real potential and who produce generally good content will refrain from bothering with DYK or even be deterred from future editing.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I like your edit. However, you didn't mention the capacity of the stadium versus how many fans were able to attend the game. You also didn't mention the use of riot police and the woman who was injured. Could you please add that somehow? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAroom ( talk • contribs) 18:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Hey there; I was wondering if we should stick a little notice on Vlad's talk page to deter him from doing the C&P action from Cycling News. I probably unknowingly did it for the Farrar Independence Day ref as I tried to put it into my own words as much as possible. I know I should have read both the articles that had been referenced upon, to notice the larger-scale of the affairs, rather than let it go unnoticed. For that I apologise, and I shall look more closely next time. Cs-wolves (talk) 23:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Cycling for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 23:46, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Match in progress requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an unambiguous misrepresentation of established policy.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}
) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the
the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact
one of these administrators to request that the administrator
userfy the page or email a copy to you.
Warburton1368 (
talk)
19:03, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Please do not make the TFD personal as you did by calling me Arrogant in your edit summary. I know you created it and therefore have a strong feeling its needed but do not make anything on Wiki personal. Warburton1368 ( talk) 18:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Mr. Kevin, Seleznyov plays for Shakhtar ( http://www.transfermarkt.de/en/evgen-seleznev/profil/spieler_59908.html) and Nazarenko for Tavriya ( http://www.transfermarkt.de/en/sergiy-nazarenko/profil/spieler_24043.html). Yours reversion are wrong. Please, leaves in http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ukraine_national_football_team&action=history-- Noel baran ( talk) 12:09, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Thx, so how does one know when the cascade protection has taken place? Tony (talk) 12:49, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
¡Bien de alguien que se la come! Greetings.
Sgorbalan (
talk)
04:33, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know that I do not appreciate this edit at all. You can attack DYK as you wish, but then don't expect friendly attitude to you from others. I did not say it is impossible, I said I can't think of how (I speak Dutch but not as first language). Old Dutch used archaic constructions and there is me (= mede = "middle", "intermediate") in that meterm word. Materialscientist ( talk) 23:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
I notice you claimed I'm stubborn. Perhaps this would be a good time for you to buy a good mirror. You are equally stubborn. The three of you claimed a consensus when you were in the minority. When you stop being stubborn, you will admit that you made a mistake or at least confirm your commitment to the policy on consensus. That's what I'm asking you to do. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 23:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Please do not falsely label edits as vandalism as you did here. You need to engage with the other editor towards a compromise. Let me know if you need more help. -- John ( talk) 09:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, absolutely. I doubt it'll need tweaking, but if the shock does happen, it will be amended accordingly! I imagine the Aussies will try and get it done even within the final few kilometres of the race, when time loss won't be possible. Yeah, I'll lift the stage profiles from there as I'm doing the rest of the refs on that page at present. The only thing about the final stage I like is the finish. That said, don't want to see another Abdoujaparov on the line. Cs-wolves (talk) 14:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
May I humbly suggest that if there are that many small issues on a set of hooks, that you put them in one list? It would be tidier and mean that I or another admin could just work through the list. Otherwise it looks rather messy. Of course I could be full of it, but I thought that would be better for next time. P.s. Not sure about the crab thing, I thought it was fine, but I'll leave that one up to others to decide. Panyd The muffin is not subtle 13:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I've noticed your good work in highlighting issues at DYK (I think it's funny that Panyd asks you to keep them in one thread, since they weren't very happy when I continued the same thread for a week about the daily errors :) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure that my suggestion regarding the link for that news item counts as the correction of an error rather than a mere suggestion for an improvement. I'm not fussed either way, but there'll probably be someone who'll throw a WP:hissy-fit over that fine distinction. Deterence Talk 16:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Im sorry im new to wikipedia didnt know how to talk here. Im from south america and the south american wikipedia both pele and maradona have their recognition as the best player of the century at the top of their pages so people can see it 1st hand(which is what most ppl read). The recognition for maradona from different sources, players(mostly brazilians surprisingly), Im brazilian(livin in us), DTs , polls, maganizes, countries etc is not listed here but thats okay. But this wikipedia is very towards Pele and he has all top recognitions at his top page and some things are not true, like he was the best player of 1958 worldcup etc...when it was vava the golden ball winner which is not posted here or 1962 garrinchas best player and golden ball winner etc...I noticed the english wikipedia is very biased to the side of Pele, i only wanted to give maradona one line of credit with one source( as opposed to many many sources and lines in the south american wikipeda) but I guess its too much to ask in the english wikipedia i apologize. Anyway, this will be my last attemp, its up to you, wether you think its fair or not. But I know already...
still Good luck and wish you best
bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by FIFApoll ( talk • contribs) 20:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
No, no. You are making a vandalism. Take a look to the UEFA official website. This is the source, it is written Czechoslovakia and Soviet Union.-- 87.17.239.30 ( talk) 12:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Kevin! Could I ask you to explain why you removed the ready tag in this discussion? Swarm u | t 11:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi there - just a quick note. Regarding this edit, the idea is that it's a pun, of sorts. Perseverance (the barge) weighs 32 tons, and as a result 32 tons of Perseverance were required when hauling grain from Surrey to London. I know some people might have a problem with the hook, but I think it really 'hooks' the reader to what is otherwise a rather dull subject, and as a result it will hopefully get a lot more views and generate more interest in a historic vessel that most people sail past every day without realising. I'm hoping you'll reconsider your edit in the light of this explanation, and keep the 'measurement' in. The Cavalry ( Message me) 15:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Toast to a Worthy Toastee Award |
In gratitude for your helpful corrections to DYK items before they hit Main Page. Thanks for making Wikipedia better. And therefore, .. "Drink no longer water, but use a little whiskey for thy stomach's sake ..." Or something like that. Sharktopus talk 22:09, 19 August 2011 (UTC) |
Hi there KEVIN, VASCO from Portugal here,
regarding the WP:FOOTY discussion i started per se, i won't add one word besides the fact that i have already re-replied, you can add any further comments if you like. Please don't take offense when reading it, i'm only venting my frustration at trying to help - in not the best manner, no sir - and getting scolded, getting a bit annoying...
Also regarding the discussion, but in case you don't want to add anything there, could you please tell what "threats" did i make "beyond my authority"? Is that when i say to people in summaries i will get them blocked (only one i can think of seriously)? I never said i could block anyone, where did you imply it? I'm merely saying (in other words) i will get in touch with an administrator and see what they can do. If the admin replies "This does not warrant a block at all, are you insane?", i can live with it man...
I would really like for one reply, especially regarding the second issue please. Attentively - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 22:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
And the edit summary at WP:FOOTY was again one of a few you have directed at me when i have done nothing to you: "as you asked", meaning "you want a suggestion, here's one", may i ask why all the - seeming - hostility (and please don't ask me the same, i have no hostility towards well-intended users as yourself, i should just learn how to work better as a team, especially regarding the WP:MOS aspect)? Regards -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 22:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Attentively, keep it up - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 09:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kevin!
"blog not a RS for blogger's claim of his own influence"
I won't add the text again since I don't like edit-wars.
But you should check these Twitter links:
http://twitter.com/#!/JohnSinnott/status/106315405605339136 http://twitter.com/#!/JohnSinnott/status/106315912721858560 http://twitter.com/#!/JohnSinnott/status/106316318818578432 http://twitter.com/#!/JohnSinnott/status/107067652949811200
John Sinnott is the BBC journalist that helped me contact FIFA regarding this error.
Edgar ( talk) 05:45, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
From the timeline of edits, "tools of ignorance" was in the article on August 20 before it was submitted to DYK; the review didn't start until August 26. I had never heard the phrase either, but it is clear that it suggested an interesting contrast both to the sportswriters who used it and to the article's creator. Sharktopus talk 04:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Kevin. For future reference, the term used in U.S. English is " football player." :) — David Levy 18:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't normally do this (leaving notes on user talk pages like this), but it is rare to see three editors completely miss the obvious while arguing about something (well, actually, it is more common than you would think). I'm also not sure whether any of you are likely to look back at that talk page, so I'm dropping notes off on all your talk pages to point you to Talk:Lancaster Carriage and Wagon Works. In truth, I came close to missing the obvious myself, which is probably why I'm going the extra distance to make sure the old standby trick of putting square brackets around something isn't missed next time. :-) Carcharoth ( talk) 00:15, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Again, another friendly input from you to me, what on earth is happening (judging from the very last lines, again you refer to me as a COWARD)? The only thing where i agree with you 100% is that i have to stop belittling other people's English skills, even though i'll never be caught dead writing in a WP whose language i have no idea about, everybody is here to help (well the well-intended users that is). Here's a story regarding different WPs: last year, on Festus Agu, i told a user this was not DE.WIKI, his edit summary answer: "Fuck off", only received a warning after i complained to an admin, but i see User:ArtVandelay13 - the "perpetrator", don't worry, he's since apologized, all's cool now - has another reputation here, one which i can only dream of...
The rest (the human wastes, the joy in reverting this or that edit) is dedicated solely to VANDALS, yes i know it's against WP policy, but i cannot control myself. On top of my bipolar condition, i have been harassed in a vile manner - do i hear you say "well deserved"? - by a punk after an edit war in Quique Flores where EVERYBODY said one thing as to what the article's name should be, he told another, and has been destroying my user page and sending me horrible messages every since, i get really wound up by that, i tell you. Should i leave WP for a couple of months and cool off? Maybe, but if i want to contribute/improve articles, how can i do it OUT of WP?
Also, i know that WP:FOOTY is not WP:AIV, but since 99,9999% of the vandalism i come across is on football and have had MANY situations in which i played by the book and received - go figure - ZERO feedback, i opt for that variety quite often. Again, i stress the following: how am i going to get in touch with users that: 1 - have dynamic IPs so chances are they'll never read the message; 2 - even if the IP is standard and/or there is an account, i don't talk to vandals because i am fed up and there are people here at the site much more equipped than i to do that.
And now, for the surprise that will make you loath me even more: i'm not 12, not even 22, i'm 39 years old. Obviously, besides the bipolar situation i am not going to go into detail on my personal life with a person that has no intention of being on good terms with me, beats me why. I can only add i am here to help, and right now (i have to respect you and not perpetuate a lie) i only wish to stop writing those summaries and play 100% by the book, so that i can avoid receiving any messages as this one - no friends in the real world, still have time to make enemies in the virtual one...
I have been blocked once - ah, another cool story, once User:ECanalla reported me for my summaries and did not even have the courtesy of notifiying me, not even a bonafide vandal gets that treatment - so if you feel i deserve another (obviously you do), activate the due procedures, i'll take it like a man as i took the first one. But please stop with this attitude towards me, i have not been playing by the book at WP on numerous occasions, i'd be stupid to deny it, but what have i done to you personally?
Attentively, from Portugal - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 15:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
No, there's only one: Confucius (whose birthday is September 28). :) howcheng { chat} 23:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
You made a valid and excellent observation when you asked "why would a reader assume that a honeyeater eats nectar?", since the bird name is honeyeater, not nectareater. That's a valid observation regarding people who see the word, but know nothing about the bird. However, people who know about those birds would assume that honeyeaters eat nectar, because that's what most honeyeaters eat. I didn't delete your "honey," from the hook; I merely restored "nectar." By including both "honey" and "nectar" in the hook, it can stay interesting to people who know about honeyeaters and people who know about the meanings of words. Sorry that I didn't make myself clear in my edit summary, as I think we are on the same page here... -- Orlady ( talk) 22:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
What's in there now makes no sense. You have "The" followed by an open bracket. At least try and make it grammatical. 81.142.107.230 ( talk) 16:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Kevin, just curious – does this really sound correct to you? I just can't get my head round it. Indeed, I always think it sounds very strange when anyone mentions the Northern Ireland Assembly... if something's of Ireland, the word is Irish, surely? Mary McAleese isn't the "Ireland president" – she's the president of Ireland, or the Irish president. Isn't "society of Northern Ireland" or "Northern Irish society" better? JonC Talk 20:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi there KEVIN, VASCO here,
i guess the redirect is for keeps (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2011_October_9), i give up trying to see the logic in this, especially when the person who requested the move vandalized Vilanova's article, thanks for your assistance though.
Keep up the good work - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 22:17, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Well OK, but only because you asked for it. The word "pathetic" is as good an example as any. But note my preferred phrase was "some negative comments", Joseph Fox's was the vaguely pejorative "moaning", and yours was "not been intended to improve the encyclopaedia". Three different things.
Was the memorable word "pathetic" (rather than a more strictly descriptive phrase like "very bad") intended to help the encyclopedia, by attracting editors to fix the problem? Probably, but I'm not so convinced that that intent actually helps. Hmm, it says you were a priest, so you must have a lot of experience thinking through such issues. But when I put myself in the place of someone reading that word and deciding whether to obediently go look for errors, here's what I imagine thinking of:
I recently made a similar negative comment about Simple English Wikipedia (search for "errors, which I can find almost everywhere I look"). But the context was explaining my edit, not expecting others to hop to it at my command.
I usually save this speech for those who aren't doing anything to solve the problem. That doesn't include you (although I am usually unable to determine if your opinion outweighs the original author's opinion, and I leave the issue for others). But, well, you asked for it. Perhaps there is a consensus to make you an administrator, just to fix Main Page problems, which is what happened to me when I was narrowly approved in 2006. But I normally avoid that level of Wikipolitics. Art LaPella ( talk) 17:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I see your name all the time on national football team articles. So how would you like to join a task force on that subject? To signup and see why I want such a task force, go here. Cheers, Bar Code Symmetry (Talk) 23:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. You edited the Thomas Kirkman DYK hook to change "no mathematics" to "no algebra or geometry," based on you reading of a cited source. DYK requires that hooks be supported by the article, which still said "no mathematics" and did not mention algebra or geometry in that context. I checked the sources and edited the article so it would support the hook. Now the original article creator has removed the mention of algebra and geometry from the article, and I've pulled the hook out of the DYK queue so the contention can be resolved at Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Kirkman. Please come by and have your say. -- Orlady ( talk) 16:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
You commented on Template:Did you know nominations/Peter Beck the other day and I believe that it's been all good for the last few days. If you've got a moment, could you cast your eye over it again and confirm things with a tick, or let me know if there are outstanding issues? Much appreciated. Schwede 66 23:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all the hard work you do related to DYKs!
LauraHale (
talk)
03:48, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 21:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
OK, what does it mean that it was known informally as "West Germany"? Because the actual name was the "Federal Republic of Germany"? (It seems in the same category as the USSR being known as the Soviet Union.) And did the modern nation of Germany really occupy a "smaller area" back then, or was it in fact, two countries? St Anselm ( talk) 00:50, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Kevin, Apologies for my disparaging remarks some months ago. Unwarranted. Thanks, Ericoides ( talk) 08:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Main Page Barnstar | |
For picking up so many errors, major and minor |
All your work there and especially at DYK is appreciated. I'm glad to see that you are a self-described pedant - if we can't be pedantic on the Main Page, where can we? Of course on many occasions others will disagree with you (I certainly do sometimes), but you are very much a net positive. Mikenorton ( talk) 11:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kevin McE. Thank you for your Welcome. I've already read a lot since I started a couple weeks ago, and therefore I was pretty sure I edited that article properly (references were already there). Also, I didn't want to seem rude, but there is so little space in the edit summary line, so there is no letters left for friendly banter ;) I now started a dicsussion on the talk page as requested by you, but I also put the order that you reverted back in, I hope that's okay for now. Greetings, Jonathan. Jonathan0007 ( talk) 08:48, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
You know, the pun hadn't even occurred to me when I wrote it (at the time, my own 31-hour loss of power during the same storm was very fresh on my mind, and there were large parts of Connecticut still in the dark). It was nevertheless appropriate to edit it. Daniel Case ( talk) 03:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
If you have a problem with anything I say, ask an uninvolved administrator to look at it. Don't ever remove or change my comments, you will find it quite futile. Parrot of Doom 20:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
(prep 3) You removed his birth year. That's okay, it was there when the nomination was intended for his birthday (27 November), but it was reviewed to late for that. On the other hand, it's more astonishing that he (still) composed knowing his age before the click to the article, right? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 00:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kevin, apologies for not responding, I am currently sans internet at home so haven't been on WP since I left the office on Friday...... -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 08:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I provided a direct quote from the PWI article and backed it up with an online reference from Count Grog himself. This is also stated on his official website. I believe this user can verify the offline hook if necessary. Is this enough to solve the BLP issue? 72.74.217.99 ( talk) 21:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hm. No one seems to have acted to your comments. Do you know any admins who might be prompted to act in the next 30 mins?-- Peter cohen ( talk) 15:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment re the Dec. 19 discussion. I feel the action was censorship, and expressed that opinion on User Tone's talk page. Sca ( talk) 16:21, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
You observed that the article doesn't mention the son being biblical, I also don't find "filicide" in the article, what do you think? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
There may be a difference in UK and US grammar here. In the U.S., "United States" is most often used attributively in frount of other nouns, without taking the possessive enclitic. That is, a publisher would write "United States economy" rather than "United States' economy". I suspect that the reason behind this was the lack of an adjectival form of "United States", so that it came to be used synonymously with "American". -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 20:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI: Talk:Show Boat#True/truly. howcheng { chat} 23:24, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Improper renaming of six articles". Thank you.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Twafotfs ( talk) 11:28, 30 December 2011 (UTC)