User talk:Cresix/Archive 2

Fluid Intelligence
Cresix, please stop cancelling my edits on Fluid Intelligence. I cited 3 legit studies from respected journals. Without these citations, article doesn't represent full spectrum of current research. I did read the papers and cited most important ideas from them. — Preceding unsigned comment added byRunig (talk • contribs) 03:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

So, are you going to leave biased and one-sided wikipedia article as is? — Preceding unsigned comment added byRunig (talk • contribs) 14:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Wait, but I supplied papers' conclusions with links to actual papers, what's wrong with verifiablity then? — Precedingunsigned comment added by Runig (talk • contribs) 14:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

What's wrong with you? I've added exact citation from another wikipedia article N-back which mentions the same two studies disproving memory training benefits? Why have you deleted the edit again? If you delete my edit, delete that one too and let wikipedia be one-sided, biased and useless.

Cresix
Cresix, you stopped me from editing the American Catholics page. I was in the middle of writing down all the names I remember or STRONGLY suspect being Catholic, and THEN i was going to add the citations. For example, Matt Damon I suspect is Catholic because his wife and children are and he married her before she gave birth to their first baby....as a Catholic myself, I know how much the church hates births out of wedlock. (That, and I checked the IMDB page). Peter Dinklage attended an all Catholic boys school in New Jersey and has spoken in public about not havng gone to church in a while (he has lapsed a bit, but he is still a baptized and confirmed Catholic, all 3 and a half feet of him and I suspect his new daughter too.). Steven Tyler and Joe Perry: Joe Perry's sons spent most ofntheir childhood in a aboston suburb where about 80% of the town attends a Catholic church on Sundays; that, and his background is Italian and Portuguese:THERE IS ONLY ONE CHRISTIAN DENOMINATION IN THOSE LANDS. Steven Tyler's mother was a Caholic schoolteacher anf Steven attended that school as a boy.Lady Gaga has publicly confirmed she is a a Catholic and so has Kevin Smith. John Ford and Frank Capra were irish and Italian and decidedly not Protestants. John Bon Jovi had relatives that owned a funeral home down the street from the local parish in Raritan New Jersey, it was a Catholic funeral home and he has spoken publicly about it. Springsteen is the same.

Wyclef Jean I was wrong about and was going back to erase him, but then you erased everything I had done. I ask that you give me time to collect my sources before you erase next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.218.103(talk) 01:24, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Current/Past Members of the Beatles
There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Good call Cresix, I posted a link at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles and I opened a discussion on "Classic line-up" field optionshere. Also, thanks for the kind words on my talk page, and for your thoughtful participation at The Beatles. — GabeMc (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a discussion taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 03:44, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I think I found a good solution to the template issue, take a look at the proposal now, it might satisfy everyone's concerns. — GabeMc (talk) 06:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Me personalising comments?
Not sure which comment you're referring to. I respond to idiotic and rude comments firmly, and will continue to do so. HiLo48 (talk) 21:33, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You would have to acknowledge that the comments to which I responded in a way you don't like WERE bad posts. Yes, I come on strong in response to stupidity and bad manners, but do please note the words "in response to". Had there been no stupid and rude posts, you wouldn't have seen those posts from me that offended your sensibilities. I'm assuming that the posts which led to my responses that you didn't like also led to you criticising those disruptive posters' on their Talk pages. HiLo48 (talk) 07:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

D-max IP relentless editor
The editor on the d-max page won't stop, and uses various IP address's. I also stole your toolbox, if that's ok.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Right but we are over a dozen times now. The page needs protected.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 02:40, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism
The unexplained deletion of content? Yes, I do consider it vandalism. And, no, I do not consider reverting it an inappropriate use of Twinkle. Is there something here I am missing? ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 23:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Simplified English
Cresix, I need to discuss the edits of the Reflist template on the Simplified English page with you. All references to Shufra should be removed, as they are a violation of Wikipedia COI. If you need verification from the ASD Simplified Technical English Maintenance Group on this matter, I can supply you with that. The Shufra references are spam that were included on that page as spam in order to direct people to a private business that is using the page to advertise its Simplified Technical English training services. RickWojcik 03:38, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Post at help desk involving you
Hi Cresix. As you removed certain material from Erdős–Bacon number, and a help desk question has come up about it, I thought I'd give you a heads up. please see Help desk.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Tashir (historical region)
Hi, and thanks for your welcome message! Regarding your remarks on the necessity of adding reliable sources to the article I just created (Tashir (historical region), I am fully conscient of that, and actually did it, putting the article I got most of the information from in the References section. It comes from a scholarly publication, the author has his own wiki page (Cyril Toumanoff). I purposefully didn't rely on local (Armenian & Georgian) sources as they are fraught with nationalist bias. I hope this clears the matter; if I missed something or did not put the reference right, please mention it to me, I'll fix it...Susuman77 (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Miko Amansec
Quick question about the article you AFD'd which was speedily deleted what sport did the subject of the article participate in. &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 19:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, just wanted to check it wasn't football/soccer as if so it would have had to been added here. &#9733;&#9734;DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 19:39, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Shangela Laquifa Wadley
I left feedback on article's talk page. You're absolutely right and posted a recent article on a singer's announcement that he is a transgender female. Take a look and let me know what you think.--XLR8TION (talk) 13:26, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
—cyberpower ChatOnline 18:13, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I think you are right.
After looking at that particular wording, I think you are correct that the image should be nuked if it was only used for the biography article. However, as on the Hannity, Heraldo, Lawrence O'Donnell, and Rachel Maddow show logos, MHP's likeness is part of the show logo used to illustrate those shows. Logos are accepted as of this date.

Since the image has a legitimate rationale for the illustration of the show, then it seems to me that the second use in the biography article is acceptable. J JMesserly (talk) 00:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, but there is an article for the show. See my rationale there:  Talk:Melissa Harris-Perry (TV program).  It depends on where the Free only WP content contingent want to draw the line. I think it is reasonable to use in in the bio article, if the Fair use rationale for the show article is correct.  That is, I would think it fair to use the Hannity logo in the Hannity article if there weren't any free images of him.  J JMesserly (talk) 00:39, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Bedazzler
You removed a section of the Bedazzler article as "unsourced trivia". I think you're right, but you missed the previous slew of changes which altered the article into an advertisement for the "new owners" who seem to also own the account which did the changes (Sasgroup2012). I am going to restore the article to its prior state (including the section you removed): please keep an eye on it to help ensure that they don't hijack the article again: I'm going to suggest that they add their involvement rather than simply overwrite the previous history. TIA HAND —Phil | Talk 16:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Paul McCartney FAC
If you can find the time, I sure could use some help with the prose. Paul McCartney FAC. Thanks. — GabeMc (talk) 22:28, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Deaf schools / schools for the deaf
I urge you to reconsider the reversion. If you say that "the people are deaf, not the school", then by your definition, we can't allow 'deaf social clubs', 'deaf culture' and so on. In any case, Belfastshane is actually correct - deaf people, teachers and sign language interpreters do refer those schools as "deaf schools". The Deaf community regard those schools as part of the Deaf community and its social network. Thank you for your time. 0zero9nine (talk) 07:58, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've decided not to revert your reversion as I thought a compromise via minor edits would be better. Thanks. 0zero9nine (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Andy Griffith "Death" section content
Cresix, thanks for taking care of my edit request yesterday to the "Death" section on Andy Griffith. But a user just unnecessarily added a sentence back to the end of the paragraph about the death certificate and heart attack. Can you please delete it? The user apparently wasn't aware that issue was already resolved AND that the heart attack is already included in the first sentence. The sentence to be removed is: "On July 6, 2012, Griffith's death certificate was related and listed the cause of death as a heart attack.[51]" Thanks. --76.189.114.18 (talk) 13:23, 6 July 2012 (UTC) 13:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC) 13:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Update: Nevermind. JTRH already took care of it. :) --76.189.114.18 (talk) 14:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Sgt. Pepper straw poll
There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc (talk 23:14, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Eyes
Would you mind putting the newly created Talk:Mental retardation/FAQ on your watchlist? I'm leery of having it go unwatched by anyone but myself. (Feel free to improve the FAQ. I'm not really satisfied with it.)  WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Cflores29
Aside from Cflores29, you may also need to keep an eye on the IP users 108.196.86.132 and68.4.7.52. Both are on different ISPs, but they operate exactly like Cflores29 with their make-believe information and piss-poor grammar. -Areaseven (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, my hunch was right. After using a different IP tracker, I discovered that both 108.196.86.132 and68.4.7.52 are on the exact same location (Irvine, California). - Areaseven (talk) 07:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

PROD on Young Critics Circle
I am challenging the PROD you made on Young Critics Circle. The article did have sources from major newspapers and television networks, which meet WP:NEWSORG.Right from the article's creation, I made sure that those independent news articles will be included in the first edit; it is only unfortunate that the organization doesn't have its own website or headquarters, but suffice it to say that it did receive extensive media coverage here in the Philippines. --- Tito Pao (talk) 02:41, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Aurora shootings
Yes, apologies for that, it was unintentional. Sepmix (talk) 21:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Wikicreate91 and Creators Syndicate
I've brought up the issue at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Mangoe (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Reply
The list, i felt, was becoming overwhelmed with various actors, actresses, writers, directors who aren't as notable to claim. Some of the ones i kept may also be bit actors, but played memorable roles, such as Morgan Paull with Blade Runner. Rusted AutoParts 21:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC). :How was that an edit war? I reverted once. It's disgustingly bloated with scarcely notable persons. May be notable for an article, but not everyone should be listed, in my opinion.Rusted AutoParts 19:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The Skin I Live In
Yeah, I have absolutely no idea what, in my edits, constituted an "unsourced POV" to you, but there was nothing in there to that effect whatsoever.110.33.240.80 (talk) 15:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You clearly did not realise that sentence was in the review from The Buenos Aires Herald and was on the page before I even edited it.110.33.240.80 (talk) 15:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Edits Removed
Hello,

I'm very new to this whole thing, and so I hope you'll help me how to do things correctly. I made some important edits last night to a page (Protandim) and they were removed (by you, I think?), saying that I didn't provide references, etc. One of the changes I made was to add information directly from www.PubMed.gov (the researching institutions and journals in which the studies were published), to information that was already written and referenced. Can you tell me how/if I need to reference it differently in that situation.

Another change that I made was to add some information and quotes directly from the companies website, and I don't know how to create the specific citation within the document to lead the reader directly to that information. Can you help me understand how to do that?

I also removed a section discussing Protandim's effect in a study that was not a Protandim study, as I found no mention of Protandim in the introduction or abstract of the reference cited, but I have since downloaded the entire study and see that Protandim is, in fact, cited, and so that was an error on my part, and I appreciate the 'removed edits frustration' that led me to read further into that study. Thank you.

And so, in short, I'd like to correctly reference/cite some necessary edits to the information in order to present a more accurate piece of information for readers, and would appreciate any direction you can give me in doing so.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely, 75.245.247.167 (talk) 17:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC) KJohnson
 * Just randomly noodling about, Cresix I'm quite impressed by this. Did you base this off a custom template or write the whole thing off the cuff just for the IP? I'm not much of a barnstar awarder but that looks like good work to me. :) Can't tell from the history either (at least as far as I'm inclined to click), did good content result also? Cheers! Franamax (talk) 04:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

New York College of Health Professions
My apologies if I am replying in the wrong place. I'm new to Wikipedia editing but trying to catch on to the ways things work. You had removed the "controversy" section I had edited in stating that it lacked a reliable source. I did include two (now three) links to external sites which include student feedback concerning the college. I am guessing that you feel those do not meet the requirements of reliable sources. If that is the case, do you have any recommendations as to what could constitute a reliable source for this type of situation? There are no legal documents or similar items to include as these issues are managed within the walls of the school (and on social media sites). The issue is integral to the future of both the school and the student body and needs to be visible. Any advice is appreciated. Ammendmentone (talk) 16:12, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Maryland Pride
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Gyrofrog (talk) 18:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Hope Solo
I have added a few more links to FIFA.com, on Hope Solo's 2012 London Olympics statistics. All my posting on Hope Solo's statistics are verifyiable on FIFA.com. However, my posting are in paragraphs, while the match records are in numbers, but it is obviously correct and accurate. Thanks for keeping an alert eye, I don't want to read erroneous articles either. Best regards, Harvardton (talk) 18:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Removing unreferenced entries from List of games with concealed rules
I note you recently removed some entries from List of games with concealed rules because they were unsourced, but you left a considerable number of similarly unsourced entries in. Any reason for the inconsistency? Are you planning on adding references to these, or should they perhaps be deleted as well? —Psychonaut (talk) 19:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * First and foremost, removal of some unsourced information does not obligate anyone to remove ALL unsourced information. No one is expected to fix all of Wikipedia in one day. That said, if you look at the article's history and talk page, you will see that I am systematically removing unsourced items. I first removed those unsourced more than five years, then those more than four years, three years, and two year. I also remove any new unsourced items that are added so that this process of endless accumulation of unsourced information does not continue. I remind you that any unsourced material on Wikipedia can be removed per WP:V and WP:BRD. If you wish to restore an item, feel free to do so as long as you provide a reliable source. Cresix (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. I was just trying to figure out if there was some method behind what you were doing, or if perhaps you had overlooked something. —Psychonaut(talk) 19:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

24.131.61.47
Can you take a look at List of television spin-offs? Our friend 24.131.61.47 persists in reverting to this edit. Trivialist (talk) 01:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Reversion
“Overlinking?” Because I doubled the number of links in a sentence from one to two? So you reverted the entire edit? What are you, a bot? —Wiki Wikardo00:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:ANI/I discussion notification
Discussion here.--Shirt58 (talk) 08:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Reply
Now that i've taken a moment to cool down (apologies, by the way), my problem with it at first was the fact he only wrote the songs, not help with the composition. But I can see why you'd want to add him. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 21:11 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood
Hi Cresix. I saw you reverted my edits and the only reason you gave was "better." I'm sure you meant well, but that is very vague and of course subjective. And in the process of reverting the entire edit, instead of just a piece or two of it, you also removed two new, strong cites (from CNN and the LA Times), and added back an incomplete Washington Post cite that I took the time to complete (by adding the date, publisher and reporter's name, etc.). As well, you also added back a cite to a story (from the Wall Street journal) that was published before Eastwood's speech even happened. The last sentence had very odd phrasing ("comedic portion" and "addressed a vacant chair next to him"). Although it was strangely humorous of course, it wasn't a stand-up comedy routine. It was a presidential convention speech. And the chair reference should be direct ("spoke to an empty chair"), as Wikipedia encourages. I'm fine with not splitting it into a separate paragraph, but this was a very prominent event in Eastwood's life, which is evidenced by the fact that it has its own article. In fact, it should probably be expanded a bit in Eastwood's article. Almost everyone agrees that this will be the most-remembered speech of both conventions, and that Eastwood will be associated with an empty chair for the rest of his life. When making an edit, especially when it involves many different factors, it's usually best not to do a wholesale reversion, at least not without discussing it with the editor. (Unless of course it's clearly disruptive or vandalism.) It's like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Thanks. --76.189.97.91 (talk) 05:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I added a characterization ("rambling") of Clintwood's monologue that was independently commented upon and reiterated in many major media outlets, and you've reverted it.  Similarly, I included the NYT's quotes about the reception by Romney campaign staffers and Scott Walker's real time reaction to Clintwood's performance. These seem quite germane. They will certainly be remembered for a long time, given the prominence of his appearance and the viewership. His Superbowl halftime ad will also be remembered. The fact that it is rarely mentioned now, half a year after the Superbowl, does not indicate by any means that it has disappeared from American consciousness, no more than Anne Richards' "born with a silver foot in his mouth" characterization of George H.W. Bush at the Democratic Convention in 1988  or Janet Jackson's "nipslip" at the halftime at Superbowl XXXVIII in 2004 have been forgotten.  By deleting references to this noteworthy episode, you seem to have appointed yourself the sole arbiter of what's important and what period of time must elapse to come to a judgment about it. I suggest you reconsider your deletion. Activist (talk) 18:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

emotional baggage
why inform me but not User:Jacobisq who did much more work on it than i did ?--Penbat (talk) 18:52, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

User:Activist inappropriate editing at Clint Eastwood talk page
This is to make you aware that User:Activist copy and pasted your and my comments from your talk page andhis own talk page into the Clint Eastwood talk page, as if you and I posted them there ourselves.Here's the edit. I couldn't believe it when I saw it because I knew I hadn't posted those comments there. Activist did not have my permission to do that, and I assume he did not have your permission either. I removed your and my comments from the Eastwood talk page. Activist also copy and pasted his own comment from your talk page, including the original date/time posted. I'm not sure what can be done about this, but I'll leave it up to you to decide. I don't know Activist, but I told him in my edit comment never to do that again. I do agree that the empty chair speech content needs to be expanded a bit in the Eastwood article, but what Activist did is ridiculously inappropriate. I alsowrote Muboshgu about this since he had commented in the Eastwood talk page thread. --76.189.97.91 (talk) 20:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I saw your reply on my talk page. You're very welcome. As I said, I do feel that the empty chair content should be expanded. However, I will no longer participate in that discussion because of Activist's actions. I hope that you or someone else will warn him never to do that again. I see you wrote Activist on his talk page. I also commented there.--76.189.97.91 (talk) 21:28, 9 September 2012 (UTC) 21:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Activist apologized but then gave a nonsense excuse for why he did it. He claims that's what you told him to do and that he didn't know it was wrong. Ridiculous. --76.189.97.91 (talk) 18:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Fluid and crystallized intelligence". Thank you! EarwigBot  operator /  talk 04:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Authoritarian article reverts
Hi, why did you revert my edits on the Authoritarianism article?? You've just deleted factual content that contained sufficient citations to sources that are credible and well-known world news websites. And, i just added another source to one of the deleted contented. Nguyen1310 (talk) 03:11, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Damon
That news report cited him alongside Natalie Portman, who did graduate. Both of them were listed as "Class of ___", but you were right. Later on in the paragraph, it explains that for some reason or another he did not end up graduating. See this. He was an English major. Should we include that? Spelling Style (talk) 21:45, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Flynn
Really? I recall another editor said that on biographies of living people, children are generally not included UNLESS they have much media coverage, since they are under 18 and this would be considered a privacy violation. Anyway, I guess this can stay. He's been featured in an article at least four times a week, photographed, named and all. Spelling Style (talk) 00:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Beatles RfC
Hello, this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll here, to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band " THE BEATLES " mid-sentence. As you've previously participated eitherhere,here, here, orhere, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. ~ GabeMc  (talk 02:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism
To save duplication of effort, I will just give a link to this post on another user's talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 23:53, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Elizabeth II word usage
There seems to be several admins around but no one wants to take any action. Can you help us out with this problem?

Here at Elizabeth II we are facing a sort of edit war on how certain lines of Elizabeth's biography should be written. Originally, the article read, "Elizabeth's only sibling, Princess Margaret, was born in 1930." BUT I changed it to, "Elizabeth had a sister, Princess Margaret, who was four years younger." Another editor stated that the former was necessary because readers would need clarification she had no other siblings. See User_talk:DrKiernan; I left several messages but the editor failed to respond. Spelling Style (talk) 16:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I meant the admins were not responding when I wrote them. Also, I was wondering which word usage is correct? Or is either acceptable? I want to be sure I am doing the right thing. Spelling Style (talk) 16:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Elizabeth II
I've since left a comment on Elizabeth II's talk page. I would appreciate if you could leave your consensus as well. Spelling Style (talk) 22:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

71.173.56.68
i am not the same as 71.173.56.68, can you not see i am reverting or correcting his edits? a.k.a. fellini page, where i removed his unsourced spielberg, cronenberg, milius claims, and i add sources to my aditions to pages a.k.a. scorsese page, when has 71.173.56.68 ever added a source to one of his claims? i hope i have cleared this up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lettertojane (talk •contribs) 15:08, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Matt Damon
Sorry, I watched the film Team America: World Police and thought Matt Damon really was a member of this group — Precedingunsigned comment added by George gray bre (talk • contribs) 18:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Mars Hill College
I saw you undid the text I entered for Mars Hill College. It is a true fact, not false. MHC is a private college.

Cited from both the Mars Hill College page and the Western North Carolina pages on Wikipedia.

From the MHC Wiki page: "Mars Hill College was founded in 1856, and it is the oldest college or university in western North Carolina. The college was originally named the French Broad Baptist Academy, after the nearby French Broad River."

From the WNC Wiki page: " Mars Hill College, affiliated with the North Carolina Baptist Convention, is located 15 miles (24 km) north of Asheville. Founded in 1856, it is the oldest college or university in western North Carolina.

I'm not sure exactly how to cite this, but since it is on two other Wikipedia pages, it is viable. I put a citation on the page coming from the Mars Hill College website. I'm not sure if it is in the correct format but I want to make certain this accurate information remains on the page. I can cite other websites if need be. I will be adding this again to the NC page. If there is a special note needed for this I would ask you to let me know. Thanks for your understanding.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncashbo (talk •contribs) 04:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Here is a conversation I had with an Admin last night. So please do not revert my changes. This Admin said they were okay now.

Mars Hill College

"Can someone tell me how to cite correctly then?

I have several websites. I tried to cite it with the actual Mars Hill College website...I want this to be added but nobody has responded to my request for help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncashbo (talk • contribs) 04:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, it looks like you handled the referencing process OK. Just use http://www.mhc.edu/about-mhc instead of the Wikipedia article, and you should be fine. --Jayron32 04:52, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

OK. So, when I hit the 'cite this source' I can just add the http://www.mhc.edu/about-mhc for the citation and that will be enough? I don't know how many sources I need to use? I don't want it to look like false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncashbo (talk • contribs) 04:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, just use the "cite" tab in the edit window, then click the "templates" pulldown, select "cite web" and fill out the form. Use that address as the URL, put the title of the page under title, enter the date you accessed the page, etc. Just fill it all out, and it will insert it for you. --Jayron32 04:57, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Great! Thank you a lot for your help. I just cited that source so hopefully it should be ok now. Do you think you could take a look at it and make sure for me? If not, that is quite ok. I think it should be good now though. Thanks again for your help. Ncashbo (talk) 04:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Like Looks good to me. --Jayron32 05:01, 29 September 2012 (UTC)" — Preceding unsigned comment added byNcashbo (talk • contribs)

What was said here?
On the help desk.— Vchimpanzee ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 20:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Found it.— Vchimpanzee ·  talk  · contributions  · 20:44, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Yale SOM
The image files are not the same. The previous one was a 2006 file (of lower quality) which incorporated the motto ribbon. The ribbon has since been removed from the current 2012 shield that is being used by Yale SOM. Handsdown.1 (talk) 16:18, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I would like to make it clear that I am not engaging in 'edit warring' and that I am not reverting your edits simply for the sake of reverting. The 2 shields are genuinely different in terms of resolution, color (e.g. explicitly the book) and compositional arrangement (i.e. ribbon previously mentioned). Also the previous file was JPG, which has been replaced with a PNG (with transparency) file, which is more commonly used to avoid white backgrounds. I hope you will consider what I have pointed out. Handsdown.1(talk) 16:25, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I have added a new entry to the talk page to notify relevant editors. Please advise on whether it is adequate. Thank you Handsdown.1 (talk) 16:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

D. W. Griffith
Hi, it appears information was added by Ophuls20393 to the article, then removed, thus no new change except rearranging of already existing information, the names that were re arranged were the names you deleted so i believe you mistook this for a new addition, i re added them as they all seem to check out, except for Michael Mann who i deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.239.60 (talk) 21:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

in this case it precisely does matter who made the edits and when they were made, hence why you only deleted my addition of Andrew Dominik to the Terrence Malick page, also before you deleted information you could have checked the wikipedia page for directors who studied under D. W. Griffith, which contains many of the names

you do understand we are talking about directors who studied under griffith almost a hundred years ago, and you expect an individual source for each one (other than a whole wikipedia page dedicated to the topic) to verify? — Preceding unsigned comment added by86.138.239.60 (talk) 21:40, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Indiana Jones (franchise)
Cresix, you said you canceled a change I had made. I've made a number of small or medium edits to that entry today. Can you specify what you canceled?

Thank you, rwpatcwp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwpatcwp (talk •contribs) 21:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Jon Heder's ancestry
Hi,

I made a few days ago a change about Jon Heder's ancestry and you said that the source wasn't reliable. If you look closely, you see that he has English ancestors in the 1600s, he also has Scottish, Danish, Dutch and German ancestors.

http://worldconnect.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=PED&db=neogeo&id=I160154 — Precedingunsigned comment added by 213.214.55.75 (talk) 19:07, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Civility
Cresix, thank you for your contribution. However, as a Wiki reviewer, I hope you are aware of Wikipedia:Civility : "editors should behave politely, calmly and reasonably, even during heated debates." "Be careful with user warning templates. Be careful about issuing templated messages to editors you're currently involved in a dispute with, and exercise caution when using templated messages for newcomers (see Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers). Consider using a personal message instead of, or at least in addition to, the templated message." "Don't Handsdown.1 (talk) 15:32, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Make snide comments
 * Make personal remarks about editors
 * Be aggressive"

Lady Gaga Fame
Since the debate on the file has yet to be officially finalised. There is no reason to remove the link on the page. Also, I do not believe it is a copyright violation if there is a clear fair-use rationale. Handsdown.1 (talk) 15:34, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Cresix, thanks for your reminders but you've already made it clear that editors can be blocked. Instead, why not explain more of the nuances of the problem in detail on my talk page instead of replying via templates? I'm convinced that you believe I am inexperienced and indeed, I would truly appreciate it if you offer me more guidance. If you look at the edit times, I left you a message before reverting your edit so I wasn't ignoring your message. Handsdown.1 (talk) 16:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I've written more on the talk page - I'm actually learning quite a bit from this. A very stimulating debate indeed! I left you a very important question on the talk page Cresix :) Handsdown.1 (talk) 16:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Response to user page editing
My apologies. I merely meant to help others evaluating suspicious edits. Being my first `undo' of an edit I was somewhat paranoid that I had missed something and this was, in fact, a correction until I saw the user's previous edits. I wished to make the previous edits of the user more apparent. Again my apologies, it won't happen again.

Friecode (talk) 01:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Biographical articles/children's gender and name in lead
You've helped me out with another question in the past. What do you think of this? Spelling Style (talk) 03:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Then actually, those other GAs and FAs were wrong. I still do not see the sense in censoring her child's gender or name, but if that's what the general consensus agrees on, it must be followed. Spelling Style (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

List of Americans of English descent
About the changes I've made​​, I didn't think I should provide a source which indicates that these people are of English descent because it's already present in their respective pages. Do I have to do that everytime if I want to add someone in the list ?

Censored
I was just referring to that as a fancier way of saying they hid her son's information, but I see your point. Thank you for the info. Spelling Style (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * See the Portman talk page again. I decided to cut such info out of the other articles mentioned as well. Spelling Style (talk) 05:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Protandim
Hi Cresix. Good job uncovering the COI issue. I noticed that you added a COI template to the article, but since the COI editor's contributions have been minimal to date, I removed the template from the article and added a COI notice to the Talk page instead. Just wanted to let you know so it didn't seem like I was stepping on your toes. OK?Rhode Island Red (talk) 17:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Savoy Truffle Electric Piano
To many people it doesn't matter if it is a Rhodes or Wurlitzer in any given song from the 60´s, but to me it does. I've tried to dedicate myself to the history of the great man Harold Rhodes and his invention the Rhodes Electric Piano ( www.fenderrhodes.com ) that I love. The Rhodes has played an incredibly important role for music since it was introduced at NAMM 1965. Almost every day I find a faulty reference, and I constantly try to set the record straight and help correcting the errors. Right now I face a humongous task when I realize that almost everything written about the Beatles is full of mistakes. The Rhodes was first used in January 1969 on "Get Back" and it was played by Billy Preston who joined the Beatles the same day. The Rhodes used was a gift from Don Randall of the Fender Corporation, and was sent to Apple studios during autumn 1968. All songs recorded before this uses other electric pianos like Wurlitzer, Hohner, RMI and others. F.Y.I / Freddan

Sorry!Forgot to introduce myself.

My name is Frederik Adlers, and I created the website Rhodes Supersite together with James Garfield 1996, and I'm the sites lead historian. I'm also the author of the story of the Fender Rhodes published in several international magazines. My sources are Harold Rhodes himeslf among many others. I would very much like to contribute to corrections about the Rhodes, but unfortunately it is impossible, even on Wikipedia. Regards, Frederik — Preceding unsignedcomment added by 217.208.111.26 (talk) 14:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

If you don't want to correct the mistake, I want to point out that the Rhodes piano hasn't been cited with a correct verification either, therefore it shout state "electric piano" instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.111.26(talk) 14:47, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Minor edits?
Thanks for following up on Jkta97's seeming unwillingness to show a little consideration to his/her fellow editors. I've chased some of them, and cleaned up several of his/her messes; it's a serious time waster. Take care! &mdash; Uncl<b style="color:darkred">eBubba</b> ( T @ C )01:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * He/she is still at it. Keeps capitalising wikilinked terms for no good reason. Mind you he/she has stopped marking edits as "minor". - Fanthrillers (talk) 00:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Jkta97 is now overlinking. Link. - Fanthrillers(talk) 00:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hey Cresix, thank you for helping to fix things up in the articles on Mary-Kate Olsen and Ashley Olsen. Much appreciated! Safehaven86 (talk) 16:47, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Why did you delete what I added to the Evancho wiki page? I did list reliable sources, what more info is required? I have the Billboard mag the info came in and it was posted on the artist's web site!

Spoilers in movie articles
Hi Cresix. Seeing as you recently edited the "Don't Be Afraid Of The Dark" article plot summary section I figured you're as good a person to ask as anyone: Is it really appropriate for Wikipedia movie articles to include spoliers? The DBAOTD is fairly typical of Wikipedia movie articles in general in that it basically gives the whole movie away. It seems to me this must be a serious deterrant of people seeking to learn a little about a movie they want to see. If you read a Wikipedia article about a movie you haven't seen yet it will almost certainly reveal most (if not all) of the baic story, including surprise endings. I think it would probably be better if these articles described movies without providing a detailed plot synopsis hat basically gives the movie away to readers. CannotFindAName (talk) 17:19, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Thurston Howell, III
Just wanted to let you know that I have hatted the 'eye-fluttering' discussion. Shearonink (talk) 15:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Cresix (talk) 15:33, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Saw your extra hatting....I have no idea why this editor doesn't just add the material + sources to whatever pertinent Wikipedia article they wish... Shearonink(talk) 01:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Jackie Evancho
Thanks, and thanks for your help. If you have any suggestions for the future, I'd love to hear them. Of course, as Evancho's career moves forward, there is more and more to add, so the difficulty is always to keep it as short as possible, and to decide if there is anything that can be moved out of the main article into the sub articles. Happy editing! --Ssilvers (talk) 22:26, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Cresix,you reverted my edit on the article on "Irreligion" I believe has untrustworthy information regarding some statistics on Slavic countries. I would strongly advise you to look over the numbers as they do not match with other Wikipedia articles. If the statistics are true, however, I would like to see a credible source that confirms the numbers that I am seeing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.186.135(talk) 20:03, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your friendly response to the fourteen-year-old. Lova Falk  talk  11:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

RE: Eugene Genovese
Can you tell me how Category:Cardiovascular disease deaths in Georgia (U.S. state) is an unsourced category for this article, when the text states that "Genovese died in 2012, aged 82, from a 'worsening cardiac ailment' in Atlanta, Georgia." This reflink confirms it. Quis separabit? 21:24, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey!
The IP you just replied to also keeps removing a 3RR template I'm putting on his page. §h₳un  9∞76   19:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll stop putting it back §h₳un   9∞76   20:01, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm very sorry
I'm really sorry about what I did before. I didn't mean to break the rules by edit waring. But if I did then I'm sorry, I also didn't mean to be upset with you or with Shaun too. I hope you accept my apologizes. I'm really sorry.... 67.142.168.25 (talk) 00:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Paul Erdős's Bacon Number
In response to my twice reverted addition of Erdős's Bacon number (and, by extension, his Erdős-Bacon number), and so resorted to a simple Google search for potential sources. Upon typing in "erdos bacon number", Google itself provided an answer of "3", the justification being that "Paul Erdős and Peter Berg appeared in N Is a Number: A Portrait of Paul Erdős./Peter Berg and Chris Pine appeared in Smokin' Aces./Chris Pine and Kevin Bacon appeared in Beyond All Boundaries." If this is true, it would be an update on the information presented in the text on the Erdős–Bacon number page, which reads "four" in the text.

However, I could not simply go off and list the movies myself off of IMDB (which would be WP:SYN or WP:OR issues), so I am uncertain of how to find and identify Google's sources, or whether it would be even possible to list the Google search as a citation (though this is unlikely the case, given other attitudes towards citing Google). Any suggestions on how to go about checking Google's sources? Benjitheijneb (talk) 17:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I know, but.
I'm sorry, but I found out on the news that on January 10, 2013, Pat McCrory is the new governor of North Carolina, according to the news.98.176.22.141 (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Bacon Number
What is the evidence that TV documentaries are not allowed in the calculation of a Bacon number? The Oracle of Bacon gives this as an option. Furthermore, the Bacon Number Wikipedia page doesn't exclude documentaries. 150.203.160.7 (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

It was a mistake.
I accidently thought that he was already elected. It was a huge misunderstanding. 98.176.22.141 (talk) 01:25, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry
I'm sorry.... 75.147.56.74 (talk) 16:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Genealogy Links
Cresix - I see you have reverted the additions I have been making to county pages in NC, indicating that you believe them to be in appropriate. I do disagree with you. The links I am establishing are to a national network of sites that provide historical and genealogical content relevant to each county in the United States. The information on these pages provide further context for background about each county and resources that may be helpful for a wide variety of research. I am a librarian and these pages are very much within the scope of Wikipedia. Please do not continue to revert my edits. Taneya (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC) Taneya

Cresix - I saw your comment on my talk page in response to my resinstatement of the links. I am not trying to start a link war and I have read the linking policies. The genweb pages do not violate any of the parameters listed. By which guideline in the link policy are you basing your decision to remove the links I added? Which guideline does it violate?Taneya (talk) 01:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)Taneya

Cresix - in the first message on my talk page, you directed me to discuss this with you on your talk page; which I did. On your second message, you are saying I should go to the article page. Which one is it? Also, the reason you cited on my page is still not valid for the link I added. I added one link to the page. Your text talks about adding multiple links. The link I added was indeed context-sensitive. I still do not understand your rationale for removing my link as it does not violate any guideline. Taneya(talk) 05:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)Taneya


 * Cresix, given that we're dealing with similar links across many articles, it is entirely unreasonable to discuss them individually. At this point, your talk page is the most appropriate place for this discussion. Rklawton (talk) 05:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Cresix - can you please comment again re this. I would like to try and reach consensus. Taneya (talk) 23:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)Taneya
 * I have started a centralized discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Carolina that you can point to pending a consensus outcome. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 17:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Orson Welles
I added 3 items to the Orson Welles page. I cannot understand why ANY of them were removed. 1. A remake of Orson Welles' "The Stranger" was underway 2. A stage in Woddstock, Ill. had been dedicated to his memory. 3. His grandson, Marc, had died in 2010. ALL 3 entries had citations/references. What was wrong with ALL of these. Ray Kelly webmaster at wellesnet.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellesnet (talk• contribs) 22:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Imagecapture77
I am definite I have encountered Imagecapture77 more than once; I'm just tryng to put a name on him/her. <font face="monospace" color="#004080"> FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 01:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Err, 'tis Jake Picasso of course.... how could I have forgotten? <font face="monospace" color="#004080"> FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 01:32, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * (reply) Oh, I have had my share of run-ins with Jake Picasso back in the day. I just haven't run into him since last year. Anyway I'll take him to SPI but I would guess this account will be blocked shortly anyway. I don;t think that Living Famously is the same guy though, the style is wrong. Jake Picasso specialises in fake British actors; actually I suspect he is genuinely knowledgable about the subject, but alas not here <font face="monospace" color="#004080"> FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 01:42, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * You're right- it will be blocked shortly. Blocked.--Slon02 (talk) 02:15, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Dare County, North Carolina
There are four sections to WP:LINKFARM. Which section(s) did the link to the county's history and genealogy violate? Rklawton (talk) 05:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Cresix, Will you please stop reverting the beneficial links I have added to the counties in North Carolina? These links provide further information on each county, which is the reason I have added a link to each county on each county page. Thank you. SusanCGriffin (talk) 04:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I have started a centralized discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Carolina that you can point to pending a consensus outcome. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 17:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

A Streetcar Named Desire (1951 film)
I removed one part in A Streetcar Named Desire's introductory text because it is virtually same as in the plot section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.46.202.18 (talk) 17:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Leelee Sobieski/Matthew Davis
Hello,

I received your message regarding Leelee Sobieski and Matthew Davis. The reference, the Us Magazine article, is false and Leelee was never married to Matthew Davis. A tabloid is hardly considered a reputable source, and before this fabrication was released back in August, marriage talk between the 2 didn't exist. The story that they were married is a lie and so I've removed mentions of it on their wikipedia pages and will continue to do so. — Precedingunsigned comment added by 72.227.145.27 (talk) 17:32, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Template spam removed
I see you reverted the templates at Steven Spielberg - could you explain how the 1200 plus links in the templates  are related to the subject at hand? Not one link in the templates mentions him in anyway. These are what we call spam templates - the exact thing we wish to avoid - that is adding non-related  info over many many articles. We have a huge amount of these horrible templates spammed all over - need help with that because the MediaWiki software that powers Wikipedia has several parameters that limit the complexity of a page, thus limiting the amount of templates that can be included.Moxy (talk) 00:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * So he won those awards - thus we should link the 1200 people that also won the award? We could put all the useless templates at List of awards and nominations received by Steven Spielberg that is linked in a section - but to link thousands of unrelated people is spam noting but spam.  We need to get a handle on these spam templates for spam and limits.Moxy (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I see your not understanding my position - its not the awards its the thousands of links in the templates that are not related in anyway. As for metedata = to many templates  causes an error - last thing we need is errors because of these unrelated templates - see Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. SWP:NAVBOX   - quote = "Navigation templates—sometimes called "navboxes"—are boxes containing links to a group of related articles not a list of people that have the same award.  Anyways I am not one to revert - someone will get it later - not hurting the page at this time... will move on and fix other articles.Moxy (talk) 01:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

CongLinks
I am correcting various parameters in every US Senator and Rep, particularly rollcall, washpo and ballot. This project has beemn going on for months, ever since the Washington Post changed their url formatting. It has involved hundreds of hours of effort so far, as each new code must be found manually. This is a holiday weekend, and rollcall will not be added to the Template until later. Please revert your undos of my work. 184.78.81.245 (talk) 16:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * There are HUNDREDS of Senators and Reps. I do not have time to go through them all twice. I am a volunteer. Every single washpo link is broken. You are reverting all of these for no reason. Please revert what you've done so I can get on with my work while I have the time to do so. 184.78.81.245 (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for sharing your personal view. I will report you now for malicious vandalism. Everyone else here is happy I'm doing all this work so they don't have to. I will make a special note that you made these multiple deletions over several hours without notifying me, as further proof this is malicious, not AGF.184.78.81.245 (talk) 16:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

stephen hawking erdos-bacon number?
my bad for the circular reference. here is a possible reference: http://ebs.rosschurchley.com/stephen-hawking (though master of science fiction seems to be a tv-mini series)

a google search gives bacon number 3, given by "Stephen Hawking's Bacon number is 3 Stephen Hawking and Arthur C. Clarke appeared in God, the Universe and Everything Else. Arthur C. Clarke and John Lithgow appeared in 2010: The Year We Make Contact. John Lithgow and Kevin Bacon appeared in Footloose."

do these references look ok?

best, gabriel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.3.81.177(talk) 02:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Beatles revert
I had reverted this undiscussed addition.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Beatles&diff=524754241&oldid=524416222—indopug (talk) 06:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * sorry I'm not able link correctly from my tablet. It's two edits by smoovedogg.—indopug (talk) 06:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The burden of starting a discussion falls on the person making the change. See this for general cases, and this for FAs. Anyway I'm surprised anybody would support the inclusion of a irrelevant paragraph that's mostly about Little Richard.—indopug (talk) 18:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "I suspect you really don't want to explain to anyone else" – is assuming bad faith really necessary? Anyway, I suppose what you say makes sense in general cases. But if you actually read the addition made and user's contribs in this specific instance, you'll see that you're defending a text that has nothing to do with the Beatles, added by a user who's sole activity on Wiki has been to insert stories about Little Richard's influence in various musicians' articles.
 * The reason I didn't bother taking it to the talkpage is that it is pretty obvious that the addition was completely inappropriate for a well-written and focussed article like the Beatles. Just because it was backed by reliable sources, doesn't mean we include it no-matter-what; we have to consider other aspects as well, including relevance.—indopug (talk) 03:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Except I've already done just that. Anyway, it's clear nothing productive can from this discussion, as you are unable to assume good faith on my part. Have a good day.—indopug (talk) 03:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Dog Days (anime)
The edit by User:Exukvera is actually ok, he made a separate character page as we tend to do if the character page gets too long on the main article. However his lack of edit summaries is probably why you would have thought it as vandalism. Just letting you know.--<font face="Calibri"><font color="#2A7ECF">iGeM <font color="CC6633">iN <font color="#CC14CC">ix 20:14, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds Covers
When you say you reverted my edit because I didn't provide a reference, what exactly do you want? An amazon link to the album that the track appears on?

The album is out there - http://www.amazon.co.uk/BEATLES-VARIOUS-ARTISTS-Presents-Pepper/dp/B001A5N1JQ

I don't see any references for any of the other covers listed the LitSwD page.

It was a valid edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by92.239.40.130 (talk) 21:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

It was the March 2007 issue of Mojo Magazine. I assume the actual magazine that the record was attached to counts as an acceptable reference. You can't get any closer to the source than that.

Anyway, are you seriously suggesting that every one of those cover versions listed on the LitSwD article currently stand as being unverifiable without sources? I can't even fathom what you would consider a valid reference to prove a recording exists other than the physical recordings themselves. Barcodes, perhaps? No good pre (circa)1984. Maybe the catalog number? Unfortunately, international standardization doesn't exist so really the only proof of a recording is the recording itself.

I suggest you are being a tad overzealous in your personal policing of edits. While I respect what you're doing, I am not confident you really know how much attitudes such as yours cause stagnation on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by92.239.40.130 (talk) 22:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your continued replies. Ok let's simplify things a bit. You're claiming I haven't provided verification of a music recording; I am claiming that that the magazine that it was published and distributed on is as much verification as you could possibly get. Tell me then please; what, in your opinion, would count as a ROCK SOLID verification of the existence of a music recording? — Preceding unsigned comment added by92.239.40.130 (talk) 22:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if this is the place to respond to the message that you left for me, but I'll try. There were no citations to the other writers in the list, as far as I could determine. The author that you deleted is the most celebrated and famous Cuban writer, Alejo Carpentier. If I ever get around to it, I will try to dig up a reference that will justify including him in this brief reference. On the separate Cuban Literature page, he is of course present. — Preceding unsignedcomment added by Davesvette (talk • contribs) 22:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!


Happy children join me in extending the best possible Season's Greetings to you and your loved ones at this time of year, and if you don't celebrate the usual holidays (Diwali,Xmas, Hanukkah, Eid, Kwanzaa, etc....), then we will still wish you a Happy Festivus. All the best: HarryZilber (talk) 22:10, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

protandim revert
I Cresix, Im pretty new at this so i dont even know how to sign this I had my edits reverted on the site but thought i had followed protocall in posting and waiting for feedback on edits. when i didnt get a response after awhile i made the edits that were reverted immediately (porbably bc i screwed up the first time and got flagged trying to figure it out) I think ive kinda got it but then clearly i didnt I want the page to be neutral and factual but there is language that is bias and i gave examples and suggestions on the talk page. please advise Thankfull LM

Anon 173.0.254.226
I just love when people make false accusations and try to posess articles because they don't have an answer for what you are saying, don't you? :) Anyway, I have a discussion on his talk page about this. Too bad the Admin protected it on the version without the tags. United States Man (talk) 03:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

94.169.6.135's edits at "1989 in film"
You've interacted before with anonymous editor 94.169.6.135. If you have time will you please look at his edits here? I don't like the Notable Deaths table he created but don't want to revert as he did add worthwhile information. Further, I don't like editing tables. I'm not asking you to fix the table he created, but would like you to advise me what to do next. Thanks. -Fantr (talk) 21:53, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That table was beyond repair. If there are minor formatting problems, I usually can fix them. It looks like he tried to create a table, couldn't figure it out, and just gave up and walked away. If there is useful information from his edits, I suggest adding it to the list that was there before his edits. Thanks for pointing out this problem.Cresix (talk) 01:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * We can continue the discussion here on your page if you like. He's changed numerous "year in film" articles. At 1997 in film, user Crboyer had to repair his table several times. Do we really need a table containing that much detail? The linked articles tell us what the person was famous for. I strongly advise removing all tables from all "year in film" articles. This may require doing an RFC. - Fantr (talk) 01:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It doesn't really matter to me whether the information is in list or table format, as long as the table is done properly. I am wary of any edits by 94.169.6.135 to film articles. He has such a pervasive history of vandalizing by adding false deaths. I noticed in some of his recent edits he has added rather obscure cast and crew in death sections. He may be trying to make accurate edits for a while until others become less suspicious, and then begin his old routine of adding false information. Maybe I'm being too paranoid, but I think we need to keep any eye on his edits. Cresix (talk) 02:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Pope
Sorry, I'm new. Different Presbyterian churches have taken exceptions to Ch. 25 of WCF (e.g. PCA). The original document is still held by many. To go into detail of what countries hold the Pope to be the Antichrist and what do not with Presbyterianism would distract from the point, in my opinion. The point being, Lutherans are not the only ones to believe the papacy to be the Antichrist. Those who subscribe to the original writing of WCF are others. The source is simply the WCF. Chuckd83 (talk) 19:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

It is simply not true that all of Presbyterianism (or Lutheranism for that matter) accepts the "Pope as antichrist" idea

I never said that. I said "Presbyterianism and other churches subscribing to the WCF..." Presbyterians are differentiated by the WCF. Not all subscribe to the 1646 document, but my statement was regarding those who do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckd83 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

My Edits
Hi, I just want to clear things up and let you know that I didn't add it back. I removed it because I found out it was already all sourced out on another article named Incidents at Disneyland Resort. Bigshowandkane64 (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Your welcome! =) Bigshowandkane64 (talk) 20:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013
Please do not edit my revision,as you did to "Incidents At Walt Disney World

-24. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.126.214.219(talk) 20:58, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

But I already told you User:24.126.214.219 it's all sourced out on the article Incidents at Disneyland Resort. Bigshowandkane64 (talk) 01:00, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Message
No, the message was for the IP address user 24.126.214.219. I was just letting him or her know that it's all sourced out on another Disney Land article. Sorry if I confused you.Bigshowandkane64 (talk) 01:19, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Jody Foster's Sexual Orientation
Hi, thanks for your message. I think it's already mentioned in the article that she had been in a long-term relationship with a same-sex partner. She remembers her as "ex-partner in love"). IMHO, The fact that she is not willing to use the word "lesbian" or "bisexual" to describe herself can not affect the truth of the matter. She does talk about coming out though. I think I should have used the label "LGBT" which is more encompassing and reliable. What do you think? To me, the evidence is more than enough to believe that she clearly identifies herself with some branch of the LGBT community Omid.espero (talk) 08:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC).