User talk:CaptainEek/Archive 1

Women in the Ottoman Empire
Hi Captain, that is entirely a mistake on my part. My intention was not to verify sources so much so to polish the grammar and sentence structure. Please make any adjustments you deem fit. Regards.

(I am also working on Women in the Ottoman Empire, which is quite facsinating; it too needs more sources and some TLC. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 06:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC))

Most welcome, glad to be of help, regards & bestwishes (Courtesy of User:Vinvibes Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 06:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC))

Help
Hi, can you help me with my article Draft:Jesse Bogner? It has been placed in draft and I would like some guidance as to how to get it approved and published. Thanks in advance, regards, Vinvibes.

Draft:Jesse Bogner
To establish notability of the author I have mentioned several sources from the Internet, which are newspapers, interviews and posts. These are noted tabloids like Huffington Post, The Jerusalem Post and so on and have mentioned them as references. So as per the rules mentioned here, about 7 such valid references have been provided to prove that this chap is indeed renowned enough.

Style of writing might be lacking since this is my first time. So do you think I should alter the language a bit to render it more academia like than what it is at present?

Thanks in advance, regards, Vinita.

Reference related query
Hi, can a YouTube video wherein the author is being interviewed by a journalist be used as a credible source of reference? Also this source - https://www.wired.it/play/libri/2016/11/17/jesse-bogner-un-ragazzo-casa-kabbalah/ - wherein he has been interviewed by a journalist? Awaiting inputs, thanks, regards, Vinvibes (talk) 15:05, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Howdy again User:Vinvibes! If the youtube video is from a credible source, yes (see Videos as references for more info). I note that the wired interview is in italian. The English Wikipedia does allow using foreign language sources (see Verifiability) however: "Editors should not rely upon machine translations of non-English sources in contentious articles or biographies of living people. If needed, ask an editor who can translate it for you." Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n! 19:21, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Nice user page
Nice user page. I like it a lot. Just stopping by to say that! :-) Wingedspy (talk) 00:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Noah's Ark and BCE
I'm pleased you reverted to the stable BCE version but your reason is confusing: "Although CE and BCE are more accurate, most Wikipedia users are not familiar with them, and Wikipedia thus uses BC and AD." Of course we use BCE and AD, and we have a guideline at WP:ERA. If you want to change the stable version, you need to do it by getting consensus on the talk page. As I said, this seems to be a BCE article so would need a reason particular to this article to change it and agreement on the talk page. Doug Weller talk 16:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * (facepalm) I misread/wrote that, that's my fault. Also thanks for pointing out WP:ERA, I thought we had one but couldn't find it earlier. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 17:03, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


 * No problem, I've made similar mistakes. Doug Weller  talk 18:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Events at Chemnitz in August 2018
Hi Captain,

You write that my contribution about the events in late August 2018 was 'less than neutral and has been removed'. I thought that everything that I have written was supported by references and thus corresponded well to what has happened. Can you please tell me what was factually incorrect or 'less than neutral' in what I wrote?

Wickology — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickology (talk • contribs) 01:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Howdy Hello ! Thanks for reaching out to me. My concern with your edits was generally regarding something known as due and undue weight. Just because something has been written doesn't mean that its fair to include it in the article. For instance, just because one person criticizes something and a news article is written about it doesn't mean we should cover it. When writing an article our job is not to give equal coverage, but rather the coverage that something is "due". I felt like the mentioning of criticism of the concert was not due weight, although perhaps I was in error. I also took issue with the mention of Coca-Cola, mainly because it wasn't relevant or noteworthy. I also was concerned by your use of what we call words to watch and weasal words, words like "suppossed". The main reason I left this message was your changing of "far-right protesters" into "protesters" and adding "far-left" in front of "counterprotesters". Wikipedia is not censored nor political and thus your edit seemed to be putting emphasis on the left while excusing the right, a clear POV problem. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 05:55, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Captain, thanks for your clarification. I mostly agree with your criticism of me removing "far-right" from the "protesters". Originally, my feeling was that the "far-right" label referred to all protesters, but I now see it is not true. Yes, there was indeed a small minority of far-right people who got into fights with far-leftists, so the sentence in itself is correct the way it is now. I still feel that the whole paragraph creates the impression of rampaging far-right mobs, chasing foreigners, whereas the large majority of the protesters were completely peaceful. But then again, the next paragraph mentions a criticism of this impression, so I am OK with it.

I agree to your criticism of me using words like "supposed", too.

I also agree that I was going into too much detail about the concert - mentioning Coca-Cola was probably indeed "undue". Still, I think that mentioning that there were criticisms against the concert because of far-left musicians playing songs with violent texts is not of "undue weight". The concert was squarely in the context of the events of that week and criticisms of it deserve mentioning in my view. Major German and German-language newspapers (like Bild and Neue Zürcher Zeitung) wrote articles criticizing the concert because of this. Thus, this criticism was definitely not the viewpoint of a tiny or insignificant minority. However, maybe I went into too much detail about the individual bands. I'll reformulate it in that way that I'll use a single sentence (instead of two) and will not mention the names of the bands. Wickology (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Pots and kettles
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n! 02:29, 27 October 2018

You can talk! Look at this

I would get your own house in order before you start throwing accusations!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CaptainEek/sandbox

Hello, Your personal sandbox page is appearing in this list of LGB politicians – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:LGBT_politicians_from_England

C

Dan Carden Ronald Cartland Michael Cashman Mervyn Tuchet, 2nd Earl of Castlehaven Victor Cazalet Henry Channon User:CaptainEek/sandbox Edward Hyde, 3rd Earl of Clarendon Lord Arthur Clinton Brian Coleman

That's what I was trying to remove. (from unsigned IP)


 * I see what the issue is and I have now fixed it. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 07:18, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

A heads-up
An anonymous IP stubified the Mathew Golsteyn article, on the 19th.

I made a request at WP:BLPN, asking if anyone thought that big excision was defensible. Short version, only one person tried to defend the excision, and I think their brief reply falls short. Two other contributors advanced argument for why the article should be redirected -- not really helpful when considering whether to restore some or all of the excised material.

Anyhow, I thought I'd give you this heads-up, in case you hadn't notice.

I don't think we have interacted before. Hello! Geo Swan (talk) 23:59, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Howdy hello ! Thank you for letting me know about that BLPN conversation and the stubification. It'll be interesting to see where things go from here.


 * Thanks for quickly noticing and fixing the sources I broke on Mathew Golsteyn, that was my mistake. I hope to have many more pleasant interactions with you in the future! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n! 00:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

hi
Thanks for what you brought up. I want this matter to get its full airing out. struck for socking and other high crimes --AndIn First Place  03:27, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

House of Este
Hello, thanks for helping editing the page; I do not know how to use Wikipedia so I am not sure how to address your clarification. Collateral agnate is who stands in the nearest degree of kinship in this case the House of Este/ Ercole 3. How can I clarify this I erase your “ clarification needed” and replace it with a citation where I explain this?

Thanks. Araldico69 (talk)


 * You can simply delete the clarification template and clarify the text inline, by either adding internal wikilinks (say to a page describing "agnate"), or explaining it. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 11:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi CaptainEek. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3ACaptainEek enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 19:55, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

File permission problem with File:William Alfred Weber 1978.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:William Alfred Weber 1978.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ron h jones (Talk) 02:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Howdy hello! I got the photo from ikfoundation.org. According to this link, all content on ikfoundation is under a CC 3.0 license. Do I need further attribution/permission? I didn't mean to upload an improperly sourced file, I was under the impression that it had been freely licensed through the ikfoundation, but if its not I am a fan of deleting it right away. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 04:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Click the CC link on https://www.ikfoundation.org/ilinnaeus/citingsources.php it goes to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ - that's is an incompatible license for images here. There are 7 CC licenses, we only accept 3 of them (cc-zero, cc-by, cc-by-sa) Ron h jones (Talk) 16:43, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ahhhhh, didn't realize the distinction, but I do now. Didn't realize there were so many types of CC licenses! Then I am a fan of deletion and am sorry for uploading an improper file. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 20:58, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Lucas Pouille
Hi, this is 2406:3003:2001:2d06:c0cf:5d23:f48f:b551

I did not remove content from the Lucas Pouille page. I merely transferred the content from 2019 to 2018, which I feei is more appropriate.
 * Have replied on the IP's talk page. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 09:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

ANI
Damn you were faster than me. ― Abelmoschus Esculentus  ( talk •  contribs ) 10:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad multiple folks were on it! Feel free to merge our ANI's. Crazy the stuff people do on this website... Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 10:32, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well I'm not surprised as I've seen something much worse! ― Abelmoschus Esculentus  ( talk •  contribs ) 10:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

House Shoes
Hi, so I can do this correctly please explain to me how it is improperly sourced. Also I am confused about “defamatory” statements as it is a simple fact. Is it “defamatory” if you go to Hitler’s page and it describes the Holocaust? 72.211.214.127 (talk) 07:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia requires that articles about living people be documented primarily by reliable secondary sources (such as news articles, books, and journals). The source you provided was a tweet by the subject. The only thing we can add on Wikipedia from that tweet is its text. We cannot add commentary about it, as that would constitute original research. Unless you can support the claim you made about the subject with a reliable source we can't add it. Articles about living people face special restrictions due to laws about defamation. Everything we say about living people must be truthful and accurate, lest the person sue us for incorrect defamatory statements. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 07:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I understand now. I did not originally write or source that edit, I just thought it was being removed to hide it and thought it was unfair. If I have some free time I’ll put a edit that only includes what he said in Tweet(s). 72.211.214.127 (talk) 07:30, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Aaah, I looked at the page history and I see what happened here. Thanks for working with me on this. I will reach out to the original poster and let them know our policies. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 07:35, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for Given Some Guideness. Ritesh748 05:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritesh748 (talk • contribs)

Thank you for protecting my record (Martin_Daňo) --Martindano (talk) 09:14, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

John Gilpin
... was a citizen

Of credit and renown.

A train-band captain eek was he

Of famous London Town.

Awien (talk) 22:43, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hehe you're the first person to make that connection! Very clever. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 00:08, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Or possibly we had a similar education? Awien (talk) 02:42, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Template Use Suggestion
Please see my comment on the Battle of Athens Talk Page. Thanks.--Mox La Push (talk) 08:32, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

List of Lego Movie 2 characters
Hello Captain Eek. Marquis De Potter here. Just so you know on the page I noticed something was incorrect therefore Copied the segment and deleted it, later I then pasted it on the correct area. Sorry if this caused any confusion. Marquis de Potter (talk) 11:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah! I see what happened here. So that someone doesn't accidentally revert your edits in the future, make sure that when you move a section that you do it in a single edit. Don't delete it in one edit, and re-add it in the next edit, because editors can think you just straight up deleted it. I was using our fast-paced anti-vandal software called "Huggle", and I likely got to your deletion before you had a chance to re-add it. Sorry for the misunderstanding, and happy editing! Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 18:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

RE: List of Lego Movie Characters
Yes Captain Eek. It was one of my first edits on Wikipedia but now I get it. Marquis de Potter (talk) 07:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cactus wren, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cholla ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Cactus_wren check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Cactus_wren?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Response to ANI notice
Hello CaptainEek. This is just a response to the message that you had left me on my talk page. I am a regular contributor to the National Hockey League's teams season pages. Since October, has been persistently adding inaccurate information in regards to a player's point total located in the player statistics section. I will refer to this page 2018–19 Edmonton Oilers season, as one of the examples. I had informed about them not adding accurate information in regards to the player statistics. I find that their information is often incorrect, which leads to me having to correct the information that they have provided. I have told them to stop adding incorrect information on their talk page and also within the page's history log. However, they continue to add information from either no source, or poor sources. I told them to use this website, (Statistics), as it includes all of the player statistics from every National Hockey League team, and is also the most reliable source. This is only the first issue. A second issue that this user is also involved in, is that they are unable to reorganize the player statistics section, which is supposed to be organized from a player's point total (most points to least points, or in other words, top to bottom) system. This user occasionally refuses to reorganize the statistics section based on most points to least. For example, in the player statistics section, under "Pts", one player will have a total of ten points, while another would have eleven points. The player with eleven points would be positioned underneath the player with ten points. This is supposed to be vice versa. The editor refuses to reposition the players based on which player has more points. I had also discussed this situation to the editor, but they still occasionally refuse to do as I have told them. Another user like also discussed this issue with  when he was using his former account. I honestly don't know why he is complaining about me when I am the one that is trying to fix his persistent errors. Please visit the Edmonton Oilers page that I had provided you with earlier in this message, so that you will have an understanding of what I am talking about. If any clarification is needed, please feel free to contact me. Just a reminder, I do correct the errors that makes. So if you don't see any physical evidence, just know that I correct the errors. Yowashi (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Non-free images
Hello, CaptainEek ,

I had to remove a non-free image that you added at WP:ANI. Please review WP:NFCI. Limit yourself to freely licensed images in such situations. Thank you. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  06:28, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oooooh heavens me! Didn't realize it was being used under fair use. Thanks for cleaning that up, my bad there! Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 06:35, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Gilgit article
I started a new section at Talk of the Gilgit article. Asked there that an editor knowledgeable in the situation edit the article. Achieving NPOV more complex than just stating in India or in Pakistan. David notMD (talk) 10:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Little Nine Partners Patent
CaptainEek, I apologize as I am not sure whether it is better to post to your talk page, or to the talk page of the article in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Nine_Partners_Patent but I believe your additional text and reference refers to the "Nine water lots" that were along the Hudson River, at what is now Hyde Park. The article topic is meant to be the Upper Nine Partners Patent, frequently Little Nine Partners Patent, which is not along the Hudson River, but inland by a few miles. Thank you for double-checking. WindingRoad (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I had wondered about that, cus it didn't quite seem to line up, but I think you're right that it does refer to the water lots. That would make more sense in context. Alas the source was somewhat unclear on the issue. I will remove the quote from Little Nine Partners Patent. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n! 19:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Easy to confuse, was glad to learn of the information provided and thank you for quick response, be well... WindingRoad (talk) 23:18, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Cactus wren
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: Mz7 (talk) 08:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Ted hamiltun
This is my reply to their nonsense accusation

Hi dear wiki adminstarion, It's so simple these guys all are Iranian with racist agenda attack individuals together accusing them with al sort of accusations as you observe, these guys bring same accusations they brought last time to report me and again they are repeating same old thread (see the history boarded), how many times an Individual should get banned for same reason? nothing is New in this report, We all hope they follow the rule of wiki pedia and don't misuse the power but as you see here:

They add a Racist anti Semitic allegation to the source, which was not mentioned in the cited source in Article, which meant to eliminate the presence of the Arab inhabitants of the province and spread hate

""The Arabs of Khuzestan are not indigenous to the province""

We asked them noumures times to take this phrase down but they refused, They Illegaly kept removing the Ref template for this statement, I reverted the Ref requests more than 3 times They reported me And I got Blocked 48hrs, after I wrote for other editors because I didn't know how to solve this issue( which they interpreted as ranting against them) and after I write a report In this page, They finally answered to our legal request, User User:Wario-Man took it down finally with so much anger you can see here

After that User:Wario-Man to user:Wikaviani and the other member of this team here planing to get rid of me once and for all

"Wario-man: Can we report him for a indef block him already? He keeps fabricating stuff that suits his pov-pushing agenda, it's actually sad"

Their accusation have no end they accused me even to fabricate stuff even though I uploaded the screen shots of the books from Google book and Persian publications in that Talk page, I'm not the first one beign attacked by this team you can see these guys Unlike what they trying to look, are aggressively attacking any body who bring any piece of Information contradicts their official Iranian view of history here you can see how User:Wario-Man   reverting any source of Information about Turkish people of Iran

I really don't care of outcome of their nonsense report As one of them said he's panicked from getting banned! no sir I'm not, I'm afraid from nobody and nothing

Ted hamiltun (talk) 04:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cactus wren
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cactus wren you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 08:40, 23 March 2019 (UTC)