User talk:DanielPenfield/Archives/- 2012

CACI changes
Nice job on the CACI page! I made the edit just before yours yesterday (forgot to sign in first) but it looks much better now. Wubb 20:59, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, My name is Nick Mokey, and I’m currently writing an article on Wikipedia for the Daily Orange in Syracuse, NY. The article will focus on how Wikipedia is being used in academic environments, specifically college. I wanted to know if you, as a Wikipedia contributor, would be interested in a brief interview for the story. It will take 15 minutes tops, and it would be an enormous help to me. If you are interested, please contact me at ntmokey@gmail.com, my deadline is midnight on Friday (4/28) but I can work you in any time during the day, it will just be a quick discussion over the phone. Thanks, Nick Mokey

RIT Userbox
Just to let you know, there's now a userbox for RIT students,. Kari Hazzard ( talk  |  contrib ) 15:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)-- Kari Hazzard  ( talk  |  contrib ) 15:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia New York Meet-Up
Howdy! Please come to the First Annual New York Wikipedian Central Park Picnic. R.S.V.P. @ Meetup/NYC --David Shankbone 22:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Reply
See my talk. -- (Review Me) R Parlate Contribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 23:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

MSE
About the changes on mean squared error, I totally agree with your goal of keeping pages as accessible to a general audience as possible. I think that we should also strive to be precise and concise, though. Omitting technical terminology does not necessarily make a page more accessible. I agree that what I had put there was not ideal, but what is there now is still not ideal; it introduces other problems. I also think that your comment about why MSE is used (differentiability) is a bit problematic. The real justification for MSE is its natural link to the mean, like the characteristic property mentioned on the variance page. But how to explain that in common english? I'm not sure but I think it could be done.

About the "criticism", however, the Berger book I cited as a source for that paragraph very heavily criticizes the use of MSE. I thought it was pretty clear from context that that source refers to the entire paragraph...it seems clumsy to put a citation to the same source at the end of every sentence. Do you have a suggestion as to how to better handle this? Cazort (talk) 20:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, I was thinking more about your changes to the definition. Couldn't we put the explanations that you added somewhere else in the article? This way we could keep the definition itself concise. The discussion you added about differentiability is certainly relevant in the article, but I think it belongs as an explanation of why MSE is used in certain contexts, not in the definition itself. Cazort (talk) 20:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! I am going to think about how to make the article more accessible before I edit more, go ahead and edit more if you think you can improve it. I'm a bit reluctant to include the justification you gave about why MSE is a "good" measure of performance. I have heard that argument many times--it is in many textbooks. But that doesn't mean it's correct. I think that the reasons you gave are generally the reasons it is used, but these are not the same as the reasons it is a good or natural measurement. Convenience is an argument but it's not the same as correctness. The J.O. Berger book I cited really gets into this argument in depth. Based on what I know (and I'm just a student of statistics, no expert I know), the real argument for MSE is that it is the unique "natural" measurement of error when you are trying to use means...much in the way Variance is the unique measurement of deviation for which the minimum is achieved at the mean, for any random variable. I think we should talk on the page about why people use it (the reasons you gave), but also on why people should use it, which are two different arguments--the second clarifies when its use is not appropriate (for example, when you are estimating something other than means, or when some sort of decision-theoretic structure necessitates using a different loss function). I think it's dangerous to say that the reasons it is used are the reasons it should be used...I think this leads to a very poor understanding of MSE...a poor understanding that is perpetuated by most textbooks and teachers in statistics. Does this make any sense? Cazort (talk) 22:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't see what is wrong about a normative statement here. If anything, I think it is an error of omission not to make one!  There are certain circumstances where the loss function does matter, and where choice of MSE can be either good or bad in some objective sense.  The Berger book I referenced in the criticisms section explains this in great deal and I would recommend reading it if you don't buy my argument.  There are also situations in which the loss function is rather arbitrary...but even then, MSE can still be justified as more or less natural.  For example, in practice people typically do not use MSE when estimating medians--this is because absolute deviation is a more natural measure of the distance from medians.  I think this argument is stronger and deeper than the arguments about mathematical convenience, which only hold in situations where there is no compelling reason to use any loss function.  Cazort (talk) 00:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, I want to note that I think the rest of the article (besides the definition) is actually much more inaccessible than the definition! Maybe we should work on that. Cazort (talk) 23:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Let's continue this discussion on the talk page. I think this discussion belongs there. Cazort (talk) 00:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

James Barker
You moved James Barker to James Barker (disambiguation). This is against Disambiguation unless there is a primary topic at James Barker. Are you planning an article about a well-known James Barker there? PrimeHunter (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As is usual, there is no link to the policy you cite from the relevant template page and the "guidance" under "where to put it" is word-for-word the same for and  .  Is it any surprise that I used it in a way that is inconsistent with Wikipedia policy?  -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That's okay, I know Wikipedia has a lot of policies and guidelines which can be hard to keep track of. I see you restored the disambiguation at James Barker with updated content. Another time, please first move the old page with the move button to preserve the edit history for GFDL compliance. There wasn't much to preserve here and you made significant changes without doing a copy-and-paste so I don't think a history merge is needed now. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Six Sigma
Regarding your comment, I'll try to get by there and add some more specific templates. *I* understand Six Sigma (worked at a former GE subsidiary that got split off the company - never got any belts though), but it's not accessible to a wide audience as a whole. Triona (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

User Hanvanloon
I agree with you that this user was spamming in articles and that should be carefully monitored. But I'd urge you to take the high road and just stay vigilant on the spam without entering into an edit war with the person. Some of the content looked okay from my first quick glance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helixweb (talk • contribs) 11:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, and agreed that he has been spamming, I was just writing to make sure you kept your zeal for blunting his efforts in check.Helixweb (talk) 09:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

For example, keep in mind he's allowed to make any edits he wants to his own talk page. Helixweb (talk) 09:25, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Your Continued Vandalism and Blanking

 * I urge Daniel Penfield to read the following Wikipedia policies regarding his editing of the Quality Management and PDCA pages:
 * WP:VANDAL: Blanking is prohibited - you are engaging in blanking and page deletion without raising a discussion as required by Wikipedia policy.
 * WP:Edit_war: you are engaging in edits from a personal perspective regardless of the validity of content.
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanvanloon (talk • contribs) 11:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * 1. Removing your continued attempts to promote your books and your consulting business is not blanking—see VANDAL. Per WP:SPAM, articles containing spam should either be deleted or edited so that they no longer contain spam.
 * To wit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quality_management&diff=prev&oldid=198457181 .  Note the reason for the edit is explicitly given in the edit history and is consistent with WP:SPAM.
 * 2. As for the accusation of partiality, note that I have left your legitimate content untouched:
 * To wit, compare your additions...:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quality_management&diff=192041900&oldid=188639547
 * ...to my removal of your content promoting your books, methodology, and consulting business:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quality_management&diff=198225522&oldid=198068911


 * -- DanielPenfield (talk) 16:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

re: Spinning around and around in circles
Yes, but I also added a nofootnotes tag. I'm sure that will make all the difference in the world! ;) Seriously, though, maybe I as an uninvolved editor can have better results. One other thing I did was add a "Verifiability, not truth" section on the talk pages. (Plural, because there are the same problem with the other editor's contributions on other pages.) Sbowers3 (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

"Some of the content looked okay from my first quick glance."
You never directly answered the question posed in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AHelixweb&diff=198819168&oldid=198645301. Am I to assume you're sweeping it under the carpet?

Yes, I am. I let your undo on that edit stand, which I believes speaks for itself. You were definitely correct in that instance and correct in undoing it. However I've seen other instances where you were undoing constructive edits and those were the ones I was commenting on.Helixweb (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

What's the point in having a WP:SPAM policy if you're just going to roll over when a spammer complains that vigilant editors have removed his website/publications for sale from articles after repeated warnings? What's the point in having a WP:NOR policy if you're just going to give in when a crackpot complains when his pet theory is challenged? What's the point in having a WP:COI policy if you're going to look the other way when a spammer complains when sham articles set up by his crony/sockpuppet/shill account are deleted per Wikipedia policy (viz., Proposed deletion).

It appears you're misinterpreting my comments. I never said not to remove his website, his NOR or his created articles. I said you need to calm down a bit, which I think given your tone towards me, is an entirely warranted criticism. Remember to be CIVIL at all times. This scorched-earth policy of yours to undo every single one of his edits is proof that you are NOT taking the high ground, and will likely antagonize him further. You would be a much better editor if you read WP:Civil a couple more times. Helixweb (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

"I was just writing to make sure you kept your zeal for blunting his efforts in check."
Help me understand this. This guy has been promoting his consulting business, anonymously deleting legitimate content, and flaunting multiple Wikipedia policies for two and a half months as demonstrated (only partially) by http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AHelixweb&diff=198819168&oldid=198645301. The high ground has already been taken: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PDCA&diff=prev&oldid=188690618 and thwarted, repeatedly: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PDCA&diff=189460958&oldid=188784629

Then you should be contacting an admin, not undoing every single one of his edits regardless of whether they violate policy or not. Helixweb (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

"keep in mind he's allowed to make any edits he wants to his own talk page"
What exactly have I written that indicates that I don't understand this?

From what I've seen you've undid many of his edits to his own talk page, which I believe is bad form. Helixweb (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you're too emotionally involved in this situation and it's making you less of an objective editor. I'll try to help out whenever I can to keep his spam and his unconstructive edits in check, hopefully that will help you settle down a little bit. After all, we're on the same side here.Helixweb (talk) 16:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 13:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

re: Hanvanloon
I initiated that ANI request and I will be mentoring and monitoring Hanvanloon. If you see any problems please let me know. Sbowers3 (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry that you are so upset at his unblock. Please seem my response at . I will carefully monitor every one of his edits - and I won't be a bit surprised if you also do. Sbowers3 (talk) 01:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Six Sigma
Hi Daniel, I have had a go at restructuring the Six Sigma article as per Greg's suggestion (Permalink of revised version here). Please have a look over it and comment on the Talk:Six Sigma page. It is nowhere near a good article yet, but I hope it is an acceptable baseline from which we can make further improvements. Jayen 466 19:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

City-Link Express
Unfortunately, the author doesn't have to address the issues of the prod template to invalidate it. You should bring it to AfD. For now, I can't accept the deletion. -- lucasbfr  talk 20:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Mmm, I think you are confusing WP:PROD with WP:CSD :) In fact, if I deleted the article with prod any user (the author included) could have gone to DRV (or on my talk page) and the page would have been restored without discussion. The idea behind prod is to take out the trash with minimum overhead when articles have virtually no chance to survive an AfD. But we need to really have 0 objections to the deletion in that case (or a minimum debate is necessary). -- lucasbfr  talk 13:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * David, I have declined the speedy on this because the proposed deletion was only just contested, and suggest you go to AfD with the article. Kevin (talk) 22:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Kyle, I can see you're a spammer coddler. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 23:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Local Politicians
Dan...I ask this respectfully: You don't seem to be a stranger to AFDs. Why did you make your stance known to be keep on those 2 Broome politicians, adding the straw man argument that other similar articles exist, and then go one conflicting step further and put those up for AFD. FYI: I would probably "vote" delete on them all, but that's without examining them individually. ccwaters (talk)
 * I don't know how you can read what I wrote as inconsistent with deleting the other county executive articles as that is exactly what it proposes to do.
 * In a nutshell, I will be god-damned if I let some downstate editor vote an upstate article down with a haughty "it is not Nassau County, New York either" without pointing out his implied hypocrisy. For the record, I believe the "assumption of major coverage" should be extended to county executives generally and I really would not like to see any of the articles you or I put up for deletion actually deleted.  But if people want to gleefully hack off the upstate county executives, then let the county executive article bloodbath begin.
 * -- DanielPenfield (talk) 13:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. FYI: without divulging too much personal information: I'm very familiar with Upstate New York: mostly the Southern Tier and Rochester. Your "downstate" friend looks to be Canadian. ccwaters (talk) 14:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 22:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month for December
RIT was nominated for WikiProject Universities's Collaboration of the Month. Take a wander over to the this page and vote for RIT! (Don't forget to update the Vote Counter manually) There have been several cries in the past for an RIT Wikiproject - now's your chance to prove that RIT is big enough! Mjf3719 (talk) 19:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Question about the RIT Wikiproject
I am an alumni of RIT (2004). What would I learn by going on the RIT category and wiki pages that I would not learn by going directly to the RIT website? There should be an article about RIT itself. One for NTID (maybe redirect to RIT). One for Cooperative education schools (what they are, advantages and disadvantages over non co-op schools). One for quarter system schools. One for unversities with deaf services. Other than that, I can't see the purpose. I look at the articles under there, and most of them just look like somebody wanted to create a bunch of articles to make the school look bigger than it is.

I support RIT. I was a great school, and unlike most of my friends, I actually feel that I did use a majority of what I learned there. But a school does not need to be huge to be great. A school is great, because it is great. Zzmonty (talk) 22:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

SPC & LinkedIn
EL too - but you beat me to the revert. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Was It Worth It?
Hi, Daniel. There's a big difference between saying that a change will occur, and indicating that it already has occurred. WP:FUTURE in no way supports the latter. Powers T 12:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you feel aggrieved. I assure you it was nothing personal, and this could have been discussed civilly at the time I made the changes, instead of with venom now.  Powers T 12:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I never claimed to be infallible, but the statements in my edit summaries were correct at the time. I don't know why this is bothering you so much.  What would you like me to do?  Powers T 12:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

2012 Election Need Your Feedback
I noticed you were a regular editor on the 2008 election page. Myself and other editors are odds on some edits we are trying to make to the page. Since you have already been involved in probably similar discussion, we would greatly appreciate hearing your feedback on the 2012 election discussion page under the Republicans and Ruled Out discussions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Republicans.3F

David1982m (talk • contribs) 20:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC).

Removal of maintainance templates
You might want to read this - I think there's a notice to that affect I could post, but amusingly it is a template itself. A general rule on Wikipedia is that all educational institutes are considered notable by default, except under certain circumstances which this doesn't fulfil. Ironholds (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And amazingly enough this "general rule" doesn't appear anywhere in WP:ORG. Could it be WP:MADEUP? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Cut the sarcasm, remove the accusations of bullshit, read WikiProject Universities/Article guidelines and put a sock in it. Ironholds (talk) 20:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You've apparently latched onto the word "college" in WikiProject_Universities/Article_guidelines which does not apply to the article you edited. The section governing the notability of B. Thomas Golisano College of Computing and Information Sciences is clearly the one regarding "constituent academic colleges" in WP:WikiProject Universities/Article_guidelines and it is consistent with WP:ORG.  -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahh fair enough - didn't see that. In future however, accusing a user of having made up a guideline or policy on the spot is not the best way to start a civil conversation. Ironholds (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Sum of squares
You're right that stubs must still be verifiable, but they should not be tagged with things like unreferenced, since the stub tag already implies the article needs significant work. It's a longstanding practice to remove such maintenance tags from stubs. Since the only point of the Erik9 category is as a placeholder for the unreferenced template, there's no point in having that category either, as far as I can see. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 11:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

551-555 North Goodman Street
Hi there ... great pic of 551-555 North Goodman Street in Rochester. I went ahead and added it to National Register of Historic Places listings in Rochester, New York. Best wishes.--Pubdog (talk) 23:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello DanielPenfield! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Jerome B. Komisar -
 * 2) John L. Buono -

Do you live in Penfield lol
I live in the Finger Lakes. Go to FLCC. Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rochester Midland Corporation logo.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Rochester Midland Corporation logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Xerox Tower
Thanks for making that photo gallery. Are you on Flickr too? Daniel Christensen (talk) 14:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the compliment. I do not have a Flickr account.  -- DanielPenfield (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Charles Garside
I removed Charles Garside's middle initial and swapped the redirects on these articles (so that Charles Garside is the article and Charles C Garside is the redirect). Looks like you undid those changes. When you get a chance, can you reverse that? My grandfather did not have a middle initial of which I am aware (nor did my father, or my uncle, Charles Garside, Jr). Thanks!

P.S. My apologies if this is not the correct mode of contact. I am generally only a reader of Wikipedia, not a contributor.

P.P.S. Also, while you are in there, he died on 10/31.

P.P.P.S. Just noticed the abbreviation you listed on your edit and looked it up. Definitely not vandalism. Sorry for the poor documentation on the original edit!

zg (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Mushroom House
Thanks for your work on this article. It is much better now. Jaque Hammer (talk) 15:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for catching my mistake in the Alexander Campbell Botkin article and the Albany Law School.RFD (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Orange County Community College Colts logo.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Orange County Community College Colts logo.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  06:56, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

SUNY Orange / Orange County Community College
Daniel, please excuse my unfamiliarity with Wikipedia. Could you please add the following logo for use as the college's main image: http://www.sunyorange.edu/photos/gallery/d/3487-2/1-SUNY+Orange+PROCESS+2CR.jpg It can fall under the same usage as the athletics logo.

Also, is the facebook link still not exempt? It seems to fall under the "official page" exemption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunyorange (talk • contribs) 20:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rochester Police Department patch.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Rochester Police Department patch.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:21, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Please be careful when reverting as per "WP:VANDAL"
Please make sure they are clear cases of vandalism before you revert citing "per WP:VANDAL". This edit was in good faith and was not vandalism. This edit could have been just a test or a mistake; again, not vandalism. We have to be careful not to bite. Thanks. &oelig; &trade; 07:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Infobox
Thanks for the rapid response. Much appreciated. BUT. If the fourth of those links you provided is supposed to be manual that a non-techie editor can use to learn how to correct misinfo contained in an infobox, then it's a definite FAIL. Does such a set of instructions exist? Thanks for any info. Regards. Tapered (talk) 22:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you point to the specific article and infobox you're editing? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 14:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Luckily, I discovered that it didn't need correction. It was the 2011 Cricket World Cup. But I'd still like to learn how to edit info boxes. What would be a good place to post a request for better instructions? Tapered (talk) 03:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh someone already made title :D... Well could you help me out in an infobox I'm making? Its in my user page. I how can I label it? Like give each field a name?Crowned jester (talk) 11:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Signatures on user talk pages
I have reverted this edit you made to User talk:Reginarowan, as per WP:SIGN, "any posts made to the user talk pages, article talk pages and any other discussion pages must be signed" (original emphasis). &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 19:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Darilyn Rowan
I believe we are somewhat in violent agreement on this article.

In response to your first point made on the AfD discussion, removal of an AfD template from a page is considered vandalism. Reverting obvious vandalism is an explicit exemption from 3RR. As long as each offending user is warned that doing so is a violation of policy, you can revert removals of AfD templates as many times as you wish without fear of a 3RR block.

In response to your second point, my comment on page moves not violating policy was a general comment and if you read accusatory intent, I apologize, as that was not my intent at all. The point I was trying to get across was that if the new page name wasn't a violation of policy (i.e., by including the title "Professor"), I might not have moved it back. In fact, now that I have read your response it makes more sense to me why you made your initial point regarding the move. That being said, I did feel it appropriate to restore the article to its state when you originally nominated it at AfD, because the subject changed the article from its promotional nature (which is why you nominated it in the first place) to an argument as to why it should not be deleted. This edition of the page, which is how it appeared before I reverted it, is not an article; it is a comment (albeit not a policy-based one) that should have been placed on the AfD discussion.

Hope that clears things up a bit. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 19:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, and for the record, I do believe the article should be deleted; however, I don't have any argument beyond those already given by you and, and as a matter of personal preference I don't like !voting in deletion discussions when all I have to say amounts to WP:PERNOM or WP:MAJORITY. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 19:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Help:Infobox
Could you have another look at the recent history of Help:Infobox and consider removing your "test edit" message at User talk:Haldersj? I think that could have been a good faith attempt at fixing the grammar that had been mangled by the IPs edit. Thanks. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:29, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you do your homework? Special:Contributions/165.132.123.82, an IP address allocated to "YONSEI" in Seoul, Korea made an edit at 06:38 and 20 minutes later Special:Contributions/Haldersj whose main contribution is an article about a lab at Yonsei University makes another edit.  They're the same editor. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Full marks for doing your homework so thoroughly! -- John of Reading (talk) 06:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

You're invited to the New York Wiknic!


This message is being sent to inform you of a Wikipedia picnic that is being held in your area next Saturday, June 25. From 1 to 8 PM or any time in between, join your fellow volunteers for a get together at Norman's Landscape ( directions ) in Manhattan's Central Park.

Take along your friends (newbies permitted), your family and other free culture enthusiasts! You may also want to pack a blanket, some water or perhaps even a frisbee.

If you can, share what you're bringing at the discussion page.

Also, please remember that this is the picnic that anyone can edit so bring enough food to share!

To subscribe to future events, follow the mailing list or add your username to the invitation list. BrownBot (talk) 19:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

County budget sections are violations of policy
They are unencyclopedic, and are empty sections that if they are ever filled in will become easily outdated. Please stop spamming these sections onto articles when there have been no consensus that they are needed. I will revert again after discussion. I have started a discussion at the NY wikiproject. You were reverted for a reason, putting them back was not a good idea without discussing.Camelbinky (talk) 15:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your additions to New York county articles. The ongoing discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York. --Gyrobo (talk) 16:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Reminder
I just wanted to remind you that all of us at WikiProject New York are just trying to maintain and improve the quality of all New York articles. It's often reasonable to discuss controversial changes, especially when such changes affect a large amount of articles. Questioning the intentions of other editors, and throwing random policies, guidelines and essays into a discussion, without really relating them to the topic at hand, does not further your viewpoint. We clearly share interests, so let's stick to your proposed addition to county articles, which the rest of us really don't understand. --Gyrobo (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC Oct 22
You are invited to Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and lectures that will be held on Saturday, October 22, 2011, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and here !--Pharos (talk) 04:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
 pluma    Ø  21:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Rochester, New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pittsford, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for your funny edit summary!

Bearian (talk) 20:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC) 

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited The Dana Carvey Show, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page World News Tonight (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. When you recently edited War and Peace (1965 film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Boris Smirnov and Aleksandr Borisov (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Monro Muffler Brake logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Monro Muffler Brake logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lenel Systems International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pittsford, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

October 2012
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at User_talk:MilborneOne, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. The Bushranger One ping only 22:52, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC this Saturday Dec 1
You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!--Pharos (talk) 07:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)