User talk:1234r00t/Archive 13

Requesting assistance about the interpretation of WP:CBALL and consensus in WP:MMA
There is been quite a lot of dispute regarding the guidelines of WP:MMA about future fights in fighters' records. You can see for yourself by checking the project's history. Essentially, BrendanFrye and some sockpuppet IPs have been reverting the latest change to the guidelines. This change was accepted on June 22 in accordance with a previous consensus reached two years ago which was against adding future fights (see here.) Once this new guideline started being enforced, some editors complained about it and argued that adding future bouts when they are officially announced is not against WP:CBALL and that in fact removing them is non-constructive. Editors that are against future bouts, even if officially announced, argue that there is no legitimate reason to add future bouts to a fighter's record until the day of the fight since this is a future event that is not notable by itself and it is not sure that it will happen since several times fighters get injured or are removed for several other reasons, so WP:CBALL does apply. Several examples of withdrawals occurred quite recently. Also, a record, by definition is an evidence about the past, not the future and reliable sources outside of Wikipedia do not add future bouts in a fighter's record. On top of that, future bouts, most of the time, are prey for vandalism, as vandals like to add the result of future fights, doing it against the fighter they dislike or just vandalizing the method altogether.

So, although a majority of MMA editors agree that adding future bouts in MMA records goes against WP:CBALL (see here, it was decided to open a RfC about it for editors not involved in the WikiProject (see here) since the project gets a lot of contributions from editors not involved with it. But the RfC did not give clear results (there is even an IP sockpuppet there) and certainly there doesn't seem to be a consensus to overturn the previous one. There was an agreement with editor Fayerman to avoid enforcing the new guideline until the RfC finished, but since there is no really clear cut consensus, there is also no clear cut consensus to either remove the new guideline or to enforce it.

Since this dispute has been going on for months already and an RfC did not work, I would to request your help to resolve this issue that has been going on for two months already. Jfgslo (talk) 01:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Edits erased
Recently I updated a bio with court case results which may be seen by some as negative but they are factual. My edit has been erased. I have replaced the information but expect it to be erased again & perhaps a demand I be blocked from future editing. I do not want this to happen.

To me it appears the person who created the bio may be the person editing it to only have positive info shown.

Suggestion?

XP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xplorer37 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Requesting third party input for on-going issues with a schools article
Hello. This is literally the forth or so attempt in recent memory (I've lost count) I've sought out to get some knowledgeable feedback on edits/reversions/deletions made to content concerning the Northwestern High School (Hyattsville, Maryland) article. There have been a lot of recent changes which seem to override what other admins and/or editors have previously deemed "acceptable". There is a lot of confusion on what content is appropriate or may be "bragging" or even downright "irrelevant". Again, a lot of the recent issues seem to conflict with what other admin deems relevant and/or appropriate. I would write much more in detail, but I'll wait until you give me a response on whether or not the you can actually help. I recently approached another editor in regards to the same issue, and while he/she helped, they informed me I needed to seek a third party because they aren't really familiar with schools in the U.S. and Wiki guidelines concerning them. They made some really good edits, but they also made some which (once again) seem to conflict with what other editors previously determined were 'Acceptable'. Can you offer your assistance in this matter? Thank you in advance. --Maryland Pride ... a Wikipedia contributor (talk) 14:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I've been doing more editing
I've been registered for quite a while, but because of recent work in fact-checking and exploration in politics and economics I've been stumbling into pages that are an absolute mess or are missing important information. I should be working on making a living, but I'm probably not going to stop fixing things. ;) So I guess it wouldn't hurt to be adopted.

--Meredith (talk) 18:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Sarrazin
I´m an american jew living in germany absolutely appaled by the recent open wave of racism,based on genetic arguments sweeping this country we all hoped had learned something from the past. The prophet of this rennaissance of basically nazi ideology is sarrazin who openely used genetic arguments in his best selling book. The article on him and his book makes virtually no mention of this fact so i inserted the following into the sarrazin page and have been deleted:

"He reintroduced (for the first time on a massive scale since Hitler) the concept of genetic inferiority (now of the Turks and Southeners) into German popular culture and dialogue"

as the post on sarrazin is obviously written by a german pro-sarrazin person i see little chance of a peacful resolution as they are basically insane, i mean a whole page about this hate monger and no mention of his central argument which is basically southeners are genetically inferior and are diluting the german gene pool thus the name of the book "germany is abolishing itself" this page has to be edited!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leschmuck (talk • contribs) 15:22, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Article Re: Alfred Powell Morgan - number of sons needs editing
Well, hope this is the right place, and thank you for what you do as I know you are a volunteer.

I am Alfred's granddaughter, Merrilee A. Morgan, daughter of William 'Jack' M. Morgan, Alfred's son from his first and very short marriage. I would like to have the article corrected to list four sons. My father's name is listed under Alfred P. Morgan's entry in Who's Who in America which I'm hoping is verification enough. If not I should be able to provide more. I'd appreciate it if you could let me know if I'm on the right track here and what if anything else I need to do.

Sincerely, Merrilee Morgan MerrileeMorgan (talk) 23:49, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

sugestion
how about an artical that lists Greek Gods and Godesses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.19.180.53 (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Help on another editor insulting me
Hello, there is another user leaving injurious comments on my talk page and addressing me insults when commenting his edits to an article we are both interested. I have warned him two times to no avail, about his behavior. What should I do next, if he does not stop? Octavian8 (talk) 19:04, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 10:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

How do I add a person to the High Schools most notable alum??
Hi I've been trying to add a notable alum to a highschool page and cant seem to figure it out. I have links of articles, awards, write up on the person, but need HELP badly.

Thanks in advance!

Confused — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.177.176.170 (talk) 18:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Major edits to Blacklight Power without consensus and with an apparent pro Blacklight Power agenda
Hi, You very well may not be the person to talk to and if that is true my apologies. I am one of the principle editors of this Blacklight Power article, (together with several other people). Blacklight Power is a controversial alternative energy company that has been making controversial claims of science and technology for about twenty years. For the last few days 84.106.26.81 has been making edits with the apparent purpose of putting a pro BLP spin on the article and eliminating negative information. He is not submitting his edits to significant discussion. I am not sure what should be done. I have emailed three of the other principal editors for their thoughts and I haven't heard from them yet. Any help that you might provide on this issue would be appreciated.

Best Regards and thanks, Dave --Davefoc (talk) 06:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Grooveshark edits
I don't know how to add direct links to the content in question so I added my post to the other editor below. I seem to have found myself in an edit war with the user below. I have tried explaining my reasons repeatedly but he just keeps reinserting the disputed content without responding. If I am mistaken in my approach please let me know so I may avoid this in the future. Thank you in advance. Daffydavid (talk) 22:00, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Johnconorryan, I have given the reasons for the deletion several times, but I will try again. Blogs are not considered RS (Reliable Sources) as per Wikipedia policy. The dispute does not warrant placement in the lede and is in fact addressed further down in the article. If you would like to add more in that section I doubt anyone will object. Just make sure you add references and ensure that they are RS (ie. not blogs). On another note, please ensure you read the changes you are making prior to reverting as the last time you added back some vandalism inserted by an other user. I will add this note to your talk page as well and will ask a senior editor to weigh in as well. As always - Happy Editing!

Future of the US Education Program and the Ambassador Project
There is a discussion about the future and the growth of the US education program along with the future of the Wikipedia Ambassador Project here. Voceditenore (talk) 08:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Someone removed a book I added to a page as "non-notable"
Hi, I'm brand new and need advice, please.

Someone removed a book I added to the "Barbaro" page (racehorse) as being "non-notable". The book is quite notable, the horses's owner even wrote the afterword to the book and it is reviewed as a "must have" by members of the racing community, so I think it is quite notable.

Brown, Alex (2011). Greatness and Goodness: Barbaro and his Legacy. Glen View Media. ISBN 978-0-9832139-0-1.

I don't know what to do or how to resolve the issue. If I write to the editor that removed it and they say it's their opinion that the book is non-notable and they will keep removing it, then are they the last word on what is notable and not? I'm new so this is confusing.

Thank you for any and all help! SouthernFox — Preceding unsigned comment added by SouthernFox (talk • contribs) 15:52, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, a kind editor made a Talk page for me and explained and then I found how to do the Talk page on the article and was able to discuss and explain. So it is all well. SouthernFox (talk) 23:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Request for your input on an editorial dispute
I see you offer to give advice in the case of disputes. Could you possibly take a look at the Discussion related to the 'Calton Hill' page? I have tried to enter what I firmly believe should be the way the name of the hill is displayed (accepting that possible variations exist), but am being blocked from doing so by someone who will not accept the validity of any of my sources. These are, in my opinion, quite incontrovertible and of far greater weight than the newspaper articles being cited to the contrary. Kim Traynor 23:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

New to Wiki
Hi, sorry to bother you but I found you thru a Google search as a Wiki editor who will help contact other Wiki editors. I am trying to figure out who the editor is for my partner's wiki page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Posner - I want to make certain we're adhering to all Wiki rules when it comes to submitting any edits, even if it is only a gallery picture like I put up today, and I was hoping to be in touch with the editor on that page - just not sure, as a Wiki newbie (I just signed up today for an account) how to find the editor in the comments - THANKS for any help Trisha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trishawiki (talk • contribs) 17:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, You can find the entire edit history of that page by going to . Hope that helps Mr R00t   Talk      'tribs  02:57, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal
I tried to add to the Christain Wulff article Details of the allegations have yet to be disclosed and their credibility yet to be supported. Failure to keep financial personal and business up to date was at first reported.

they didnt edit it. Will they have banned my IP address?

Kind regards

Philippa dandy_sunshine@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.225.226 (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)