User talk:Boomer Vial/Archive 7

Shannon Airport
There have been several discussions in recent years after quite annoying trys by a few users (who create these climate charts) to place them in airport articles and the concensus always was that they to not belong there, therefore they always have been removed again by different users. They barely make any sense for an article about an airport rather than the location - thats why next to zero airport articles have them and they are not part of WP:AIRPORTS-CONTENT. Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.104.14.157 (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Which discussions? I don't see anything on the article talk page, so I'm assuming they took place elsewhere. Do you have any diffs to these conversations? I also didn't find where this is mentioned under wp:AIRPORT-CONTENT. Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 19:34, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey
Sorry to bother but as you sent me a welcome... could you maybe check if i have not messed up other parts of the Age of consent article? I removed a completely unsourced table, or rather one sourced entirely to other Wikipedia articles which i guess is the same as being unsourced. I did preview it and it looked alright but i have never done such a substantial edit and am a bit paranoid that i messed something up (Usually i just fix random typos or comment. Things that are pretty hard to mess up, haha). No issue if not, just did not want to break anything and in general thought removing it was the way to deal with the sourcing issues. And again, sorry to bother and have a good day. 91.49.71.240 (talk) 01:04, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I did so as soon as I seen your contribution in the recent changes column. The edit was perfect, all the unsourced data was removed and nothing else was altered. No bother at all. If you have any questions at all, feel free to ask either here, on your talk page, or the WP:HELPDESK. Thank you for doing so, and again welcome to Wikipedia! Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 01:06, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That is a relief then, haha. Happened upon it after lurking on ANI (yes i am weird, i know, haha) and thought i could and should fix it. One thing i was unsure about was the thing under the actual table which i thought may have had a place in the further reading section. But that was minor overall. Anyway, thank you for confirming that i am not completely inept, hahaha 91.49.71.240 (talk) 01:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Your welcome. You should think about creating an account with Wikipedia. It would make it a lot easier to keep track of tasks, policies and guidelines, etc. Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 01:17, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * And it was rolled back. I guess some people prefer unsourced content... 91.49.71.240 (talk) 01:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I left a message on their talk page, asking them why they reverted. Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 01:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is in essence why i never bothered to make an account. I totally understand that people may object to an edit like that but with basicaly no pointer towards any policy reason it gets pointless. I guess that will have been the only time i removed unsourced content. It is not worth the time to argue over something so benign. The topic does not even interest me. Happened on it by lurking as i mentioned. But anyway, many thanks for treating me as a human and your assistance. Sorry for having bothered you with something, in the end, so futile, haha. Have a good day/evening anyway :) 91.49.71.240 (talk) 02:11, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess i was wrong, turns out it is well worth my time trying to understand what... on earth... is going on, or rather what i did wrong... (better not curse i think, haha). This has moved from a disagreement to being utterly bizarre for me. I have no idea what their issue is anymore. But hey, english is only a second language for me so it quite enjoyable in that regard lol. Have to always take something positive from any experience so i am doing just that... even if not easy, haha 91.49.71.240 (talk) 05:41, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It probably is very much too pointy but would it be possible to start an SPI against myself? I have absolutely nothing to hide so if that could be put to rest i would not mind at all. And in regards to the single purpose account, my IP from yesterday(the one that made the edit) still even had contributions to the DYK talk in it. So it is more lies, bad faith and unfounded accusations against me by Softlavender. This is getting rather pathetic. And for what in the end? Me making a bold edit, then talking about it on the talk after it was challenged... is that not how Wikipedia basicaly is intended to work? 91.49.73.234 (talk) 00:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

No, that wouldn't be a good idea. An administrator is already involved, and if they find Softlavender's actions to be as reprehensible as I found them to be, action will be taken against them. I would wait a while until after this whole thing is done, and leave a polite message on their talk page asking them to strike-out the comments. If they don't, that's on them. Bringing Softlavender into the conversation, so that this can be resolved. Also, for future reference, let's keep the conversation regarding the actions of Softlavender here. We shouldn't be discussing it on the article talk page. Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 01:13, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I assumed as much, I more or less wanted to point out if anyone wants to drag me to SPI, they have my full blessing and support to do so. Just to add in regards to the single purpose account... My ip changes every day, stays in the same range though. Hailing from germany every new IP starts with zero edits pretty much every day. But i have commented on a wide variety of topics, fixed a couple of typos or grammar(somehwhat recently in the "human wave" article as the most recent example), reported an error in DYK a couple days ago and before as well(so my IP range can be found in that archive), participated on the DYK talk several times(would be in the archives there as well). Longer ago i participated in an RfC on the "alternative for germany" article and some fallout from that(an ANI thread about a user named Joobo, was on their talk during an unblock request and asked Drmies a question relating to that), participate from time to time at ITN etc. Thanked The Rambling Man just a couple of days ago for the work he does at errors... and so on. I do very very little in the end but to call me an SPA is just preposterous. Just felt the need to point that out. 91.49.73.234 (talk) 01:23, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Seeing that this is pretty much resolved, regarding my conduct anyway, i really have to thank you. So my sincere thanks to you for wasting some of your time to help out a random stranger. 91.49.80.251 (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi!
Hi! I just saw that you removed my last edit from Guest House (TV series). However I explained it but I think you didn't understand. "Trivia" section is not allowed in Wikipedia per WP:MOSTV. I am sure you have now understand what I wanted you to explain. 39.38.46.147 (talk) 16:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅ Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 19:49, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Whisperback
01:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Various tools
I see that you were provided a link to the interaction tool you were wondering about. While it can be quite helpful, it can be equally as confusing. If you have further questions, don't hesitate to ask by pinging me. Wishing you a happy holiday season! Atsme 📞📧 15:44, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the message you left on my talk page
You advised me to leave explanations when I rollback an edit. Here's the issue - with the tools I have at my fingertips here, if I do certain rollbacks, there is no option for me to leave any comments. The Wikipedia system verifies that there really is something worth rolling back (reverting), and if everything checks out, the job is done. Many times, as I hit the rollback button, another editor is already in the process of making the same request, and when this is the case, my request is denied and the earlier editor is credited with the edit. So I'm not exactly sure what I am supposed to do - per another conversation with a more experienced Wikipedia editor than myself, I am now using the rollback feature less often and choosing the old-school "undo" option more often. Thank you for all of your help and input. I would type more, but there's a cat laying with her head on my keyboard. Beauty School Dropout (talk) 05:44, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

LOL, I'm such an idiot. I just realized that you were probably talking about the fact that I should leave warning notices more often on user's talk pages after I revert their edits, and you weren't talking about my edit revert summaries. Duh me. Yes, I will work on that. Thank you. Beauty School Dropout (talk) 06:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. You'd be surprised how many times I responding without fully understanding what I read beforehand. :) Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 23:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Help with major copyright violation
I need help with an article that has an 81% match using the copyvio tool. Which board would I notify? Thanks in advance. Boomer VialHappy Holidays! • Contribs 03:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I suggest working with the instructions found at Copyright problems. There's a place at the end to leave a pointer to the problematic page and instructions on when to blank the page or leave it for an expert to sort out. It sometimes takes a while to get a resolution when the case is not a clear violation.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  04:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
 Merry Christmas !!

Hi, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,

– Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 13:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Season's Greetings


Hello there! Shearonink (talk) wishes you & yours the the very best of the season! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Diwali, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Festivus (for the rest of us!) or even the Saturnalia,  here's to  hoping your holiday time is wonderful and that  the New Year will be an improvement upon the old. CHEERS!

Share these holiday wishes by adding  ~  to your friends' talk pages.

Shearonink (talk) 19:26, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Boomer Vial: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, — MRD2014 Merry Christmas! 02:10, 25 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Happy New Year, Boomer Vial!


Happy New Year! Boomer Vial, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— MRD2014 Talk 03:03, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Boomer Vial!


Happy New Year! Boomer Vial, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

– Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 00:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Operation_Entebbe
I realize it's easier to write a template code, but still, why not plainly explain to the user your objection to https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Operation_Entebbe.png ? El_C 01:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * They knew what the objection was, which is why the file no longer exists. It was already removed a few times before by another user under the same exact pretense. Besides, I did. Multiple times, in fact. Every time they refuted that it was on Wikimedia Commons. Every time they insisted as much, I checked. Lo and behold, every time they were incorrect. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 19:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

2017 Alabama Football
I dont think this is right. If you want I will stop if we can compromise and leave it at " National Champions" as long is it is not  "Consensus National Champion"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.54.187.140 (talk) 00:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that would be fine. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 00:22, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 00:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a writer at Sports Illustrated hoping to get in touch with you for a story on the UCF football team. Could you find me on Twitter at @stephapstein? (I'm new to this so not sure I want to post my email address on what appears to be an open page, but happy to DM it to you so we can proceed.) Thank you! Stephaniesi (talk) 18:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure exactly what information you're looking to obtain from an editor that just happened to edit the article you're writing a story for. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 00:42, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The story is about how the UCF title claim has made life hectic for Wikipedia editors. I'm hoping to talk to you about whether you have an opinion on the debate and how you guys are deciding to represent it (for example, the conversation above this one). Stephaniesi (talk) 01:16, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I'm not too familiar with the situation, and was only stepping in to put a stop to a conflict between editors. I recommend asking on the college football WikiProject. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 06:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Apologies on 1999 revert
FYI, I accidentally reverted your fix to 1999 while checking it out on my watchlist. I've rolled it back to your version, but wanted you to know it was just an error.

-- KNHaw  (talk)  00:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem, I honestly didn't even notice. No harm done. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 00:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I figured it wouldn't be a problem, but I just wanted to be 100%. Thanks!  -- KNHaw   (talk)  00:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit on "The Great Wall" page under the heading 'Historical Inaccuracy'
Hi,

I don't understand why my contribution, as above, constitutes vandalism.

I don't see that it actually contravenes any of the guidelines or comes under any of the (I would guess non-exhaustive list) of examples of "more juvenile forms of vandalism", and is done in good faith; the point being that it is otiose if not preposterous to nitpick pedantically about 'historical inaccuracies' in a film in which essentially a 'Great Wall' facsimilie is attacked by giant lizard creatures, which may or may not have come from out of space. The film is clearly an example of the 'fantasy' genre, I would have thoguht that historical inaccuracies were something of a prerequisite...

It may seem petty but I actually think my amendment improves the article...I'd like it re-instated please. regards 51.9.221.96 (talk) 23:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It's rhetorical, as well as unsourced. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 23:47, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you mean by 'rhetorical'. The source is the http://fm.kuac.org/post/great-wall-stands-monument-absurd-cgi-clutter, (I'm sorry I don't know how else to annotate) Notwithstanding that, neither of the above ('rhetorical' or 'unreferenced') are the reasons given initiaally for rejecting the edit; you've only referred to vandalism. Could you clarify whether your first answer or your second is the one on which I should rely, please? And will you be editing the page history appropriately? Thanks 51.9.221.96 (talk) 00:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I only referred to it as vandalism because you were inserting something is obvious, and has no encyclopedic value. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 00:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Boomer, I have to say that's rather slipshod, particularly in view of the the very first line of the guidelines on 'Vandalism', where it says; "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism


 * It would be greatly appreciated and much easier to substantiate, if you stuck to the (fairly elastic) guidelines in exercising your function. I'm still none the wiser as to what you mean by 'rhetorical' and I have provided you with a reference; would you now accept that my edit is valid? Alternatively, as I have now suggested to SwagGangster who has issued me with a warning for being disruptive, it would be prefereable to dispense with the section on historical accuracy altogether, as, to refer back to my original point, it is somewhat superfluous in such a patently 'fantasy' film, (cf "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" - I'm reasonably confident that a German invasion of Britain during WWII was never actually thwarted by a platoon of bewitched suits of armour!)(I'll see if I can find a reference if you like ;-)) regards51.9.221.96 (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * "I'm reasonably confident that a German invasion of Britain during WWII was never actually thwarted by a platoon of bewitched suits of armour" That's what I mean by rhetorical. Everybody knows that a platoon of bewitched suits of armor did not prevented WWII. That is why I had mistaken your edit for vandalism, as continually inserting such things into the encyclopedia is disruptive. Vandalism isn't black and white, and is mainly taken on a case-by-case basis. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 20:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Removing unblock requests
I noticed this edit of yours. Please leave it to administrators to deal with unblock requests unless they include BLP violations, copyright violations or the like that needs to be removed immediately. Merely being incompetent, trolling or even lying is not something that a reviewing admin shouldn't judge and take into account when considering removal of talk page access. Huon (talk) 17:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Understood. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 19:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

talk page notice (fyi)
Hi, you left this notice on an IP user's talk page. I don't know if you added it manually or if this is a problem with twinkle, but the template was incomplete and you can see the result. I'll leave this to you to sort out. Cheers - the WOLF  child  00:01, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Whoops. No, I manually add warnings after using the autmated Twinkle welcoming template. I missed part of the code, there. Thanks for letting me know. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 04:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

SwisterTwister was the sock
I was looking at SwisterTwister's ANI history to see why s/he got blocked, and came across this old thread where you kept calling me a sock. I'm the 96.xx IP. This really points out why I object to people calling others, especially IP's, sockpuppets without evidence. In the end it was SwisterTwister who was sockpuppeting, albeit temporarily.198.58.168.40 (talk) 05:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not going through this with you again. We don't even know definitively if the "sock" involved in that archived case was even Swister. You suggesting so with no evidence is an insult to Swister, as wrong as they were for socking in this instance. Even worse it's hypocritical. Bringing something up from ages ago just so you can go "Aha! I was right", especially with no evidence, hardly says anything about your innocence in the archived matter. In fact, it makes you look more suspicious. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 21:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

User name
Hello BV. I saw your post at AN/I. Had those usernames been created last month they might have been a tribute to this song from one of the 3,254 versions of Dickens tale :-) Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 23:00, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be surprised if it was just that. You as well. :) Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 02:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Insertion of BLP violations
Here you reverted the removal of a flagrant BLP violation, with the edit summary "Rvt; not a valid explanation for removal of sourced content." Except that the offending content was not sourced (and it's highly, highly questionable whether it would have been suitable for inclusion even if it was). Please be more careful about this sort of thing in the future. Steve Smith (talk) 00:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Inquiry from a Public Relations Representative for Biogen on Updating Wikipedia Article
Hello,

My name is Matt Nemet and I am a Public Relations professional at GCI Health, a firm specializing in healthcare. One of our clients, Biogen, has expressed concern regarding outdated information found on the Wikipedia page for its multiple sclerosis treatment candidate, Opicinumab.

We understand that Wikipedia readers depend on active and thoughtful editors for accurate and supported articles. Additionally, we felt that given your previous efforts editing Wikipedia pages like Opicinumab you might be interested in reviewing this page through the lens of updating older information.

To further disclose our position, we are aware that per Wikipedia’s guidelines neither the company nor the company’s representatives can make direct edits to Wikipedia pages. Respecting these rules, our priority is ensuring that this issue is appropriately brought to light. Therefore, we are engaging you, an experienced editor who can be trusted with assessing the current state of the page against publicly available information on Biogen and Opicinumab to make accurate and appropriate updates.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best regards, MSN2017 (talk) 20:12, 3 October 2018 (UTC)